HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/27/1988MINUTES
PETALUMA ,P:LANN,ING COMMISSION Sept. 27, 1988
REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7;.00 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO- THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT.:
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Bennett, Doyle, Libarle,
Parkerson *, Tarr
Cavanagh, Read
STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director
Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner
Michael Moore,.. Principal Planner
Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner
Jenny Cavanagh, Planning Technician
*Chairman
APPROVAL OF MINUTES.: Motion made by Commissioner Libarle, seconded
by Commissioner Doyle, the Minutes of September 13, 1988 were approved
as distributed.
PU.B"LIC COMMENT Bob Martin, .171 Payr,an Street - spoke on his
opposition to the use of detention ponds within the auto row project.
COMMISS.IO COMMENT Report on Commission tour of current projects.
CORRESPONDENCE Excerpt from Sonoma County Water Agency Drainage
Master Plan distributed by Bob. Martin, 171 Payran.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT Auto Center Project update, Corona / . Ely Specific
Plan. - Financing Report, Helen Putnam Award Nomination update, second
meeting in October (1'0/18/88) if needed
COMMIS'SIONER'S REPORT NONE
READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS Read by staff.
1
1 0 A_
MMITTEE BUSINESS
I. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME /SONOMA COU -NTY WATER AGENCY
'Presentation on creek improvement,, protection and enhancement
policies.
- Mr. Bill Cox, Department of Fish & Game
�Mr. Bill Stillman, Sonoma County Water Agency
OLD ;BUSINESS:
NT NUED PUBLIC HEARING
0) II. 'CORONA /ELY SPECIFIC PLAN
1. Consideration of EIR.
t2, Consideration of Specific Plan for 650 acres northeast of Petaluma
co
City Limits.
SPEAKERS: Mike Moore, presented staff report requesting continuance to
October 11, 1988.
Duane Bellinger, 464 Ely - comments on the plan; gas use and
hydrocarbon production; appreciated public hearing and planning
process; requests consideration of two school sites for Waugh
School rather than one,; Junior College has strong impact on area;
presented alternate road system for Corona area; fire potential in
industrial area.
Public hearing was continued until October 11, 1988.
i
III.
!THE CHATEAU OF PETALUMA, 325 N. MCDOWELL BLVD., AP NO's
'007-350-04 and 05, (File, 3.380).
1. Continued consideration of EIQ.
2. Continued consideration, of rezone to PUD to allow a 300± unit
senior citizens residential complex and related commercial space
(public hearing was closed September 13, 1988) .
SPEAKERS: Kurt Yeiter, presented staff recommendations.
Tom Chek - developer - concepts for commercial portion of
property.
Steve Harriman - architect - presented revised site plan showing
cohesive development of commercial and senior housing project.
! Tom McDonald - operator of proposed complex.
2
DISCUSSION ENSUED:,
Commissioner Tarr: compatible commercial occupancies, relation -
ship of project to General Plan.
Director Salmons:: broad definition of criteria for ancilliary uses
within the commercial area, staff could generate a General Plan
amendment if so directed by the Commission.
Commissioner Bennett: agreed with concerns of Commissioner
Tarr, address compatibility within findings.
Commissioner Libarle: comfortable with staff recommendations.
Commissioner Doyle: questioned parking compromises.
A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner
Libarle to recommend that the City Council approve issuance of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration based on the traffic report, noise study, and comments
from responsible agencies, subject to the following findings:
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT
Aye
COMMISSIONER
CAVANAGH
Absent
C,OMMISSIONER
DOYLE
Aye
COMMISSIONER
LiB,ARLE
Aye
COMMISSIONER
READ
Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR
Aye.
CHAIRMAN PARKERSON
Aye
Findings
1. The ,project, as conditionally approved,, does not have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self- sustaining levels, 'threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plan_ t or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of' a rare or endangered plant or' animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory.
2. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have the potential to
achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long- term,, environmental
goals.
3. The project, as conditionally ;approved, does not have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
4. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly'.
3
� J
e
a
5. The residential portion of the project is consistent with and further
promotes the objectives, gbals, and policies of the General Plan.
Through clarification of the General Plan text, compat ibility of the
.;commercial. j2ortion of the project with the General Plan's goals and
Pol icies shall be assured
6. 1 A 1980 citywide survey by the Sonoma State University Northwest
Information Center of the California Archaeological Inventory
;designates the project site as "moderate" probability of a find. Most
flat areas bordering creeks are so designated in the Petaluma area.
Inasmuch as all surrounding properties have been developed and no
items of archaeological interest were uncovered, no further study is
'warranted on this site at this time.
CD i
A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner
Doyle to recommend to the City Council approval of a Planned Unit District
and development plan based on the Chateau of Petaluma plans dated August
23, 1988, applicant description dated August 10, 1988 and the PUD findings
co and "conditions, to be edited to reflect Negative Declaration findings, listed
below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT Aye
COMMISSIONER CAVANAGH Absent
COMMISSIONER DOYLE Aye
COMMISSIONER LIBARLE Aye
COMMISSIONER READ Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR Aye
CHAIRMAN PARKERSON Aye
PUD,Findings
A. The development plan clearly results in a more desirable use of land
' and better physical environment than would be possible under any
other zoning district by providing optimum use and design for the
`specialized needs of senior citizens.
B. The property has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares;
,and said thoroughfares are adequate to 'carry any additional traffic
generated by the development.
C. 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 adequate
landscaping and /or screening is include to insure compatibility.
D. ;The natural and scenic qualifies of the site are protected, with
adequate available public and private spaces designated on the Unit
Development Plan.
E. The residential portion of the development of the subject property, in
the manner proposed by the applicant and conditioned by the City,
!will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best
interests of the City and will be keeping with the general intent and
,
4
r � �
spirit of the zoning regulation of the City of Petaluma, with the
Petaluma General Plan,, and with the goals, policies: and programs of
the General Plan Housing Element. Through clarification of the
General Plan text, compatibility of the commercial portion of - the project .
eneral Pl an's _goals and 'policies
F. By provision of 20% very low -to -low income affordable: rate housing
units (or the equivalent) , this project qualifies for a density of 32.5
units per acre, including local and State bonuses.
G. The two acres of commercial uses may contribute toward the residential
density only if a direct supportive service relationship is maintained in
a manner consistent with the General Plan
Conditions of Approval:
1. This project shall be limited to 300 units maximum.
2. The project sponsor shall enter into a development agreement or other
legal mechanism with the City prior to issuance of building permits
that guarantees construction of at least twenty percent ('20a) of the
total units for households of very :low -to -low income as defined by the
General Plan, or the equivalent, for the life of the project. Said
agreement shall also limit occupancy of all units to. persons at least 62
years in age, or as defined as "seniors" by State regulations to the
satisfactory of the City Attorney.
3. The two underlying parcels shall be merged, or adjusted to separate•
the residential from the commercial portions of the site.,, prior to
issuance of building permits.
4. The site plan may be adjusted beyond the requirements of these.
conditions, provided that overall density is not increased, residential
building coverage does not exceed 30 percent of lot and the
revisions are first reviewed and approved by the Planning Director
5. The mix of residential units may be. amended .provided that no more
than 85 two bedroom units are provided, nor more than 133
independent living units (full- sized kitchens,) and /or no more than 90
bed 'assisted units are 'p rovided within the total project. Any such
amendments must first. be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Director. Amendments beyond the parameters of this .condition require
approval by the Planning Commission and City Council as a PUD
amendment.
6. All site improvements, including parking and driveways, shall be
excluded. within 30 feet from the Lynch Creek top -of= bank or, where
riparian vegetation currently' exists, whichever is- less, or as approved
subject to a reasonable engineering and architectural alternative as
determined by staff Improvement and. grading plans within these
areas are subject to. review by the California Department of Fish and
Game prior to issuance of grading, /building permits.
A
7. All storm waters shall be collected on -site and discharged by storm
drain into Lynch Creek.
The project sponsor shall dedicate the westernmost thirteen feet of the
property (bordering US 101) to Cal Trans, to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permits. An irrevocable
offer of dedication for an additional 22 feet along the westernmost
property line shall be recorded with the property to accommodate
future widening of US 101. All property dedicated may count as
credit towards the project sponsor's fair share contribution to traffic
mitigation fees.
9. 'The buildings' construction and site improvements are subject to
review and conditional approval by the Fire Marshal, Chief Building
Inspector, and Chief of Police or their designated representatives.
10. ' Vehicular access to the residential phase of the project shall be
CO
directed to the northernmost driveway insofar as possible and practical
(deliveries and employee parking excepted) as determined by staff.
Principal access to the commercial portion of the site shall be via the
southern (existing) driveway. No additional driveways on McDowell
Boulevard shall be permitted. The suitability of vehicular access
between the commercial and residential portions of the site shall be
considered at the time that a proposal is submitted for development of
'the commercial parcel.
11. ; The project sponsor shall provide a full service shuttle schedule to
provide tenant access to medical appointments, recreational events,
shopping, etc. Transportation for the handicapped shall be provided.
The shuttle service* level to be provided shall be described in a
t program prepared by the project sponsor or operator and submitted to
!:the Planning Director for approval at or before time of initial unit
occupancy.
12. '; Pedestrian access to Lynch Creek shall be discouraged by a visually
open fence (e.g., wrought iron) or other appropriate barrier along the
entire length of property line bordering the creek. Design of the
fence or barrier is subject to SPARC and Police Department review and
approval. Gates, if any, are subject to staff approval.
13. Either through fencing or building site design, access to and from the
Senior Residential• phase shall be restricted or monitored from the Plaza
North shopping center area.. There shall not be unmonitored open
access from the shopping center to the .senior center, nor shall there
be unmonitored open access from 'the shopping center to residential
parking, subject to approval of the Police Department and SPARC.
14. The following conditions shall be incorporated into project design and
operations to the satisfaction of the Police. Department:
A. 24 -hour security should be provided for the interior and exterior
of the building. This can be accomplished through hiring
security personnel and /or installation of an electronic monitoring
system. Areas of critical concern include the interface with Plaza
F
0
- � V /90
North, drop -off areas, all perimeter parking areas; and loading
area.
B. The driveway entrances to the center should be posted as a
private driveway and set up in such a way (-either through signs
or design) that it discourages access to the facility by persons
who are not residents or not legitimate visitors.
C. Adequate vandal resistant lighting needs to be placed throughout
the facility. All exterior parking and entry areas must be well
lighted. All interior stairwells and walkways must also be well
lighted.
D. The lobby of the facility or main pedestrian entry way should be
set up With a receptionist, security person or other staff member
who can monitor those persons visiting the facility. This person
will be helpful to visitors trying to locate residents we well as
providing, assistance to residents.
E. A lock box key security system or similar device should be placed
in a location readily accessible to police, fire and . ambulance.
personnel who may required emer entrance to secure areas
of the facilities.
15. Examples of permitted uses and site design for the commercial portion
of this., site shall be processed as an amendment to this PUD .
Permitted uses of the commercial portion of this project' site, are limited
to uses ancillary to and compatible with the . senior living, facility,
subject to approval by the Planning * Director. At time of PUD
amendment, the com_merciaa ortion of the site must be found- to be
consistent with the go als and Policies o t e enera an eit `er
through design and use approvals by the City Council,, new City
policies., or General Plan amendment.
16. The commercial building may not be constructed until at least 167
units of senior housing are constructed on this: PU'D_ . Nor' :shall it be
constructed until construction has commenced on the Rainier
Avenue/US 101 interchange or until 'McDowell Boulevard North level of
service is D or better, whichever occurs first. Consistent with ,the
g oals and policies of the General Plan must be achieve d prior to
construction. of the commercial portion of this site.
17. Concurrent with initial site improvements: for the senior units, the
project sponsor shall install a bus turn -out, shelter, and pole for
future signs on McDowell Boulevard, location and design of which shall
be subject to approval by the City Transit Coordinator.
18. A hydraulic maintenance easement shall be provided over Lynch Creek,,
subject to approval of the City Engineer. As part of site preparation
for this project, the City Engineer may require selective clearing
within the easement area.
19. No buildings shall be located within 55 feet of the top of: the bank of
Lynch Creek.
7
lq/
permit for the existing
demolition p Planning
Ninety days prior to issuance of a to the satisfaction of the
20 • r sponsor shall, 'anizations which may be
church, the project rofit or,g
Director, offer the structure the non
purp .
able to move the building study shall be
noise s
f for the Sound Solutions Planning
21. The recommendations ro ect design, to the satisfaction of the
incorporated into the p Official except:
Director and Chief Building
e soundwall shall respect the 13' increased setback
a) Placement of 1 No No. 8) ;
along U • S. 101 (see standards shall be
A
liance with provides
CD b) Exterior balconies not in comp noise method that subject
reenhouse -sty with some
le glass or other
enclosed - by g noise attenuation,
' "outdoor" living experience
m to SPARC approval; and,
-wall air conditioners may be used in noise
area for
ens and
Through - the exceed 15% of floor area
c) walls
co nsideration , and windows may
, provided that interior noise levels shall not exceed
General Plan standards. commit to
n an agreement to on the
al,
22. ; The project sponsor shall subject c to Cit Engineer approv ell
articipation, s ignal in front of this site (connecting
fair share p McDow
installation o f future traCenter) landscaped median islannalsn at Lynch
coordinate the traffic sig
access to the community
Boulevard, improvements to and widening of McDowell /Washington
Creek Way and East Madison,
Street intersection• SPARC
ts ,
I and utilities are subject to
P architecture,
23: All site im rovemen
a pproval. app li c able flood mitigation
with all app in Zoning
comp
The project sponsor shall the City Council, as contained • 30 n Storm
24'. ter
requirements ado. pted by Municipal Code Chap
Ordinance Article 16,
Drainage impact Fee." Count
shall comply with the Sonoma Y
and grading ineering alternative as
25. All improvements
+ Des . i n Criteria or acceptable eng
Water Agency the SCWA
approved by basis in any future
on a fair share to improve
shall "participate funding 'mechanisms formed
26 • Applicant iona
assessment districts traffic tcongestion or other su contributing
bt a b l problems for
itr e a
areawide flooding erty is found
which developme nt of this prop
factor. a reement which shall
binding g u
!27 , The project sponsor shall execute a of each residential dwelling nit
s
stipulate that P $150.00 to the City per daily trip
u on initial occupancy If the y establishes a
Chateau, developer shall pay City
in The enerated by said unit to occupancy of any
end estimated to be g Miti ,ation and all subseq uent affic g:
Fee P units in
Major Facilities Tr this
unit (s) ,
for said units)
the fee
8
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.
Fee is subject to conciliation by the Planning Director.
28. The freeway= oriented elevations shall be designed so as not to present
the appearance of a rear elevation (i.e. no loading doors or large
blank walls, absence of architectural features found- on other
elevations, and limited landscaping as typically found on interior
property lines) .
29. Any outdoor advertising signs shall be submitted , review and
approval of SPARC or the Community Development epartment. All
signs must conform to the Zoning Ordinance and be compatible with the
building and surroundings..
30. Parking lots shall be designed so that spaces remaining after CalTran's
use of entire 35 foot easement will conform to City standards for
ingress /egress and landscaping.
31: Parking shall be provided at a
ratio of
at
least .65 spaces per
independent living unit (i. e. ; full
kitchen)
and
.4 spaces /unit for all
others. At least 10 spaces shall be
suitable
for
handicapped vehicles.
L.J
32. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during
; grading, work shall be halted temporarily 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.
NEW BUSINESS'
IV. PHYLLIS RANKIN REMODEL, 600 "B" STREET, AP NO. 008 - 045 -28
(Vile 5.1219).'
.1219 )
1. Consideration of proposed remodel, of a single- family residence
within the "A" Street Historic District.
SPEAKER: Pamela Tuft., presented staff report.
Phyllis Rankin, applicant..
A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by Commissioner
Tarr to approve the proposed remodeling of 600 B Street based on the one
finding and subject to the conditions listed below:
COMMISSIONER BENNETT Aye
COMMISSIONER CAVANAGH Absent.
COMMISSIONER DOYLE Aye
COMMISSIONER LIB ARLE Aye
COMMISSIONER READ Absent
COMMISSIONER TARR Aye
CHAIRMAN' PARKERSON . Aye
9
i
Finding
1. That the proposed work will neither adversely affect the exterior
architectural characteristics or other features of the property nor
i adversely affect its relationship in terms of harmony and
appropriateness with its surroundings, nor adversely affect the
character, or the historical, architectural or aesthetic interest of value
l of the 'A' Street Historic District.
I
Conditions
Project Specific Conditions
1. � Design and construction of windows and architectural trim work shall
ibe replications of the existing structure including sashes and sills (per
' approved plan) , subject to staff review and approval.
2. !Second unit entry lighting shall be of a design in keeping with the
!architecture of the structure, subject to staff review and approval.
Standard Conditions
3. Painting of the proposed remodeling shall match the paint scheme of
the main structure, detailing subject to staff review and approval.
4. i Separate utility meters shall be provided for the second unit as deemed
;necessary by the City Engineer and Building Inspector.
5. All requirements of the Fire Marshal and Building Inspector shall be
met.
6. ;All work within a public right -of -way requires an excavation permit
'from the Department of Public Works.
7. This project, being located in an Historic District, shall conform to
applicable District regulations and design guidelines.
8. A separate street address shall be assigned to the second unit.
PUBLIC HEARING
V. BENJAMIN- TUXHORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC., SADDLEBROOK
(formerly Bond Subdivision) , MARIA DRIVE /BANFF WAY) , AP NO.
149- 280 -45, (File 3.382).
1. Consideration of PUD rezoning to approve development plan of 17
single- family dwelling subdivision.
The public hearing was opened.
SPEAKERS: Pamela Tuft, presented staff report.
Tony Korman, Benjamin- Tuxhorn & Associates
10
A 19�
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bennett and seconded by Commissioner
Libarle to recommend to the City Council approval of the Planned Unit
Development based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed
below:
COMMISSIONER
BENNETT
Aye
COMMISSIONER
CAVANAGH
Absent
COMMISSIONER
DOYLE
Aye
COMMISSIONER
LIBARLE
Aye
COMMISSIONER
READ
Absent
COMMISSIONER
TARR
Aye
CHAIRMAN PARKERSON
Aye
PUD Findings
1. That the development plan as conditioned, results in a more desirable
use of the land, and a better physical environment than would be
possible under any single zoning district or combination of zoning
districts.
2. That the plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents
a unified and organized arrangement of buildings and service facilities
which are appropriate in relation to adjacent 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, with
adequate available public and private spaces designated on the Unit
Development Plan.
4. That the development of the ,subject property, in the manner proposed
by the applicant and conditioned by the City, will not be detrimental
to the 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.
5. That the PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable
relationship to one (1) or more thoroughfares (Maria Drive, Rainier
Avenue) ; and that said thoroughfares are adequate to carry any
additional traffic generated by the development.
PUD Conditions
1. ' Any modifications to the PUD development plan require prior approval
of the Community Development and Planning Department. 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.
0
1.1
2 . ;The PUD development plan shall reflect the following references
regarding development standards which become conditions of zoning
;approval:
'a. Minimum building setbacks:
front: 20' from back of sidewalk
side yard: 5' minimum/15 aggregate
corner side: 15'
1 rear yard: 20' for main structure
(exception: Lot #15 has a 15')
?b. Home occupations shall be a permitted accessory use subject to
CD C i the pertinent regulations of the City Zoning Ordinance related to
Accessory Uses.
T_ ic. 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 the Community Development and Planning
Director.
e. Detached accessory dwellings shall be prohibited.
i
!f. 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.
i
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 45
percent.
; i. Garage conversions
are
prohibited.
Any other questions
concerning land use
regulation,
building
i 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 adopted PUD unit
development
plan.
r
12
f
�9b
PLA MATTER
VI. TREE PRESERVATION
Review and discussion of existing City Tree Ordinance.
To be carried on the general discussion agenda to allow Commission
input.
VII. ' GENERAL DISCUSSION (if time allows)
1. Streetscape
2. Historic districts
3. Traffic mitigation fees
4. Fences
5. View .preservation
6. Conflict of interest (to be scheduled for a joint session with City
Council) ,
7. Tree preservation
ADJOURNMENT 10:00 P.M.
ATTEST
Warren. Salmons
Community Development & Planning Director
minutes 9 /27 /pcom2l
13