Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/12/1989431 PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION September 12, 1989 REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7 :00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF. N PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL COMMISSSIONERS: Balshaw, 'Bennett *, Doyle, Parkerson, Read, Tarr COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Lib'arle STAFFq Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner t Mike Moore, Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter, Principal Planner Gary Broad, Associate Planner * Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of August 22, 1989 were approved. PUBLIC COMMENT (15 minutes maximum) The Planning Commission will hear public comments only on matters over which they have jurisdiction. There , will be no Commission discussion. The Chairman will allot no more than five minutes to any individual. If more than three persons wish to speak,- their time will be allotted so that the total amount of time allocated to this, agenda item will be 15 minutes. Speakers None. COMMISSIONER COMMENT Commissioner Parkerson - Lucky Shopping Center" - all buildings are not completed, not enough parking; no landscaping; there should be a discussion on this item at a later date. CORRESPONDENCE Letters regarding items on this agenda were distributed. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Staffing - Principal Planner Mike Moore will be leaving to become Community Development Director- for City of Sonoma; Council feedback - Metcalf Machine appeal, McPhail's use. permit appeal was resolved, School Board and City Council meeting regarding growth planning held last night; discussion on amendment regulating public sidewalk obstructions. 1 432 COMMISSIONER "S REPORT None. READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS Within fourteen (14) calendar days following the date of a decision of the Planning Commission,, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or by any other interested party. If no appeal is made within that time', the decision shall be final. An appeal shall be addressed to the Council in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically the grounds for the appeal and the relief. sought by the applicant. OLD BUSINESS I. SHOTWELL AUTO BODY, 213 CINNABAR, AP NO. 019- 020 -20 (File No. 1.634). 1, Consideration of request to amend condition of ,approval (door relocation) for conditional use permit granted 6/13/89.). This 'item is not a public hearing. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson to amend Condition No. 2 Cinnabar Lane to read as follows: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BET BALS'HAW - Yes DOYLE - Yes LIBARLE - Absent PARKERS.ON - Yes READ - Yes TARR - Yes [NETT - Yes Tarr and seconded by Commissioner of the conditional use permit at 213 2. Retention of the roll7up door on the: west elevation shall be subject to inspection by the appropriate City staff prior to commencement of use.. If any improvements are deemed necessary by City staff - to assure compliance with Uniform Building or Fire Codes., the work shall be completed prior to commencement of use. PUBLIC HEARING II. REDWOOD FITNESS CENTER, 717 NORTHPOINT, LOT #1, PART OF AP NO. 007 - 401 -12 (File 1.627). 1. Consideration of administrative judgement regarding Condition No. 1 pertaining to the undergrounding of the Corona Creek Channel in conjunction with the development of the Redwood Fitness Center complex. The continued public hearing was opened. 2 433 1;1 1 SPEAKERS: Dick Lieb - Applicant representative Department of Fish and Game is taking ' a eavy- handed approach to this project; heavy planting would cause flooding at 100 -year flood levels; need for mosquito abatement in this channel; maintenance would be less if undergrounded; no existing important flora or fauna; freeway planting by applicant if allowed to underground; (Video; shown by .applicant); owner wants to plant groundcover on Caltrans right -of -way; ditch near mobile home park looks awful; owner wants to use this property for parking so larger square footage building can be built; during, the first Planning Commission hearing, applicant felt conditions would the liveable, did not foresee this as a problem at that time. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Comment Commissioner Balshaw Feels this area is an additional landscape buffer, openspace will be ruined if this is culverted. Commissioner Read How would_ this affect General Plan Stream Restoration policies? Commissioner Balshaw Against this request - 'this will not improve the looks bf the 101 corridor. Commissioner Parkerson Agrees with the original Planning Commission conditions. Commissioner Tarr Against the undergrounding idea. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to deny the appeal regarding the proposed undergrounding of the Corona Creek channel for the Redwood Fitness Center at 717 Northpoint Boulevard. COMMISSIONER BALSHAW _ Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS III. SONOMA BEAUTY COLLEGE, 714 PETALUMA BOULEVARD NORTH, AP NO. 006 - 051 -42 (File No. 1.645) . 1,. Consideration 22. Consideration college/trade of EIQ. of conditional use permit to allow a beauty school for cosmetology. The public hearing was opened. 3 SPEAKERS: Lou Sabella - 509 Petaluma Blvd. North - applicant's `representative,; building is brick, does not feel it should be painted (except the trim) ; restriping could' occur over existing parking lot: fan could not be moved very easily; would like SPARC to be flexible. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Read to direct staff to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN B'ENNETT - Yes Findings 1. The project, as conditionally approved; does not have the potential 'to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife "species,, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant- or animal community, reduce `the 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 project, as conditionally approved, does not have the potential. to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long - term, environmental goals. 3. No significant land use or environmental impacts were identified for this project. 4. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan. 5. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Highway Commercial Zoning District and the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. A motion was made by Commissioner. Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to approve a conditional use permit based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed below: 4 435 COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes Findings 1. This project is consistent with the City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and its General Plan. 2. No significant land use or environmental impacts will result from this project. A negative declaration has been adopted. Project Specific Conditions 1. This project activity shall substantially conform to the approved project description provided in the staff report dated September 12, 1'989. Minor revisions which do not increase project impacts may be approved by the Community Development and Planning Director. 2. All public sidewalks 'that_, do not conform to city standards because they are cracked shall. be replaced, subject to approval of the City Engineer, prior to commencement of use. 3. Plans shall be provided to the Chief Building Inspector for review which include clear room dimensions, label of room use and room layout. Building Code- requirements for exterior walls shall be complied with subject to the approval of the Chief Building Inspector, prior to commencement of use. 4. Project shall meet the waste water disposal requirements of City of Petaluma Ordinance 12151 N.C.S. as amended by Ordinance 1543 N.C.S. , subject to the approval of EOS and the City Engineer. 5. This project shall be .subject to administrative SPARC review prior to the issuance of building permits for tenant improvements. Review shall focus on the following, in addition to normal SPARC areas of review: a. A parking plan which incorporates the following: 1. Parking areas and accessways shall be resurfaced with asphalt or repaired to City staff approval and restriped consistent with present zoning --- crdirra- mee-- regnrremerrt standards 2. Parking in the rear of the lot shall be redesigned to ptovid-e faur--- crows- -�rf -- phi -irr -- parking: provide City SPARC Standard spaces and aisles 3. The three parallel parking spaces along the south property line shall be eliminated. 5 436 4. Handicapped spaces capable of accommodating side- loading vans shall be provided in accordance with building code regulations and clearly identified. 5. Pedestrian walkways separated from driveway aisles shall be provided to building entrances. 6. Parking shall conform to the Parking Design 'Standards adopted by the City of Petaluma. b. A landscape plan including spacing, size, type and location of plants and irrigation that includes the following: 1. The required front and rear yard 10 foot setbacks shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall be provided ' refurbished along building facades visible from Petaluma Boulevard 'North rfxffcierrrea- gei-mits, subject to staff determination. 2. A minimum three foot landscape strip shall be provided along side property lines of the site. 3. Landscaping around the parking shall be provided in accordance with the parking design standards .adopted by the City of Petaluma. 4. Clean -up of weeds /debris in and around existing parking . lot. C. Building elevations 'and site plans that include the following: 1. Repainting of the trim of the building. Enhancement of building facades visible from Petaluma Boulevard North by addition of architectural elements, such as trellising, per staff direction. 2 Relocation replacement of rooftop mounted fans and lights. Equipment shall meet zoning ordinance performance standards and building code_ requirements. 3. Removal of old signs and review of new signs,. 4. Enhancement of existing chain link fence by ,providing slats and /or landscape screening where there is existing .screening or planting A Bond shall be provided for 50% of the estimated cost of , improvements required by SPARC review. SPARC improvements shall be installed prior to commencement of use. Standard SPARC Conditions 6. Applicant shall participate on a fair share basis in any future assessment districts or other funding mechanism formed. to improve areawide flooding, traffic congestion or other ,subregional problems for which development of this property - is found to be a contributing factor. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation Fees of $50.00 per daily trip end estimated to be generated by this development, or ,a Traffic Mitigation fee as determined by the City Council pr'i'or to the issuance of a building permit. _Project contribution shall be determined by City Traffic Engineer in conjunction with 'building permit review. 43"7 7. There shall be no open storage of equipment, materials, trash, litter or packaging. All trash shall be stored inside the building or within a trash enclosure. 8. All activities conducted on the site shall comply with Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code performance standards (noise, dust, odor, etc.) . 9. All outdoor mechanical equipment, satellite dishes, fire main and all rooftop equipment shall be fully visually screened upon installation subject to the approval of the Community Development Department. Screening devices shall be shown on construction and /or landscape (� plans. 10. All exterior light fixtures shall be shown on plans subject to staff review and approval. All lights attached to buildings shall provide a soft "wash" of light against the wall. All lights shall conform to City co performance standards (e.g. no direct glare, no poles in excess of 20' height, etc.) and shall compliment building architecture. 11. Any outdoor advertising signs shall be submitted for review and approval of SPARC or the Community Development Department. All signs must conform to the Zoning Ordinance and be compatible with the building and surroundings. 12. Driveway and parking surface areas shall be improved with a City approved surface of asphaltic- concrete or concrete pavement. All parking surface areas shall be bordered with concrete curbing which is designed to meet at least the minimum specifications of the City Parking Design Standards . IV. CITY OF PETALUMA, FLOODWAY /FLOODPL_AI_N- COMBINING (FW /FP -C) GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (Files 8.116 and 3.396). 1. Consideration of EIQ. 2. Consideration of amendments to General Plan Land Use and Development Constrai Map. 3. Consideration of amendments to Zoning Map. 4'. Consideration of Floodway Zone Ordinance Text Amendment. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: J. B. Morehead - discussed previous zoning on some of this area; understands why strip zoning can be hazardous (traffic hazard) ; explained his support of property for Commercial zoning. David Keller - 1327 I Street - why was Denman Flat area changed? Why was this area downgraded? Denman Flat is a problem area and should not be taken on a case -by -case basis. Ted Kabral - 1106 Petaluma blvd. North - owner of Honda Motorcycle Shop; wants Commercial zoning. Bob Martin - 171 Payran St. - against any development in old Floodway area and Denman Flat area; do not encroach on river. VA The public .hearing was closed. Commissioner Tarr Has Floodplain expanded? Commissioner Bennett - Overdevelopment is put -off through Ag =ricultural zoning on these properties. Commissioner- Parkerson How would existing development be affected by a zoning change? Commissioner' Ben. nett - Wants. a Throughfare Commercial designation in area around Honda, Motorcycle site. Commissioner Tarr- - Why wasn't drive -in site in Fioodway? ommissioners Parkerson / Bennett . - want findings for Negative Declaration. Kurt Yeiter Principal Planner - Studies are being done by City in this area - described ,public informational meetings. Warren Salmons (Planning Director) - Maybe we should _ designate areas at edges of Petaluma River open :space (as other streams in City) The Commission directed staff to return to the September .26, 1989 Planning Commission meeting with full findings developed for these actions. V. ADOBE. CREEK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, PHASE II, EAST SIDE OF 'ELY BOULEVARD SOUTH, BETWEEN CASA GRANDE AND FRATES ROADS, ('Files 6.923A, 3.363C) . 1. Consideration of Development Agreement amendment. 2. Consideration of rezoning from PCD to PUD and review of unit development plan for Phase II (167 detached single- family dwellings and golf course). 3. Consideration of tentative map for 167 detached single- family residential subdivision. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Presentation by developer. Joe Duffel - Developer - This project will championship golf course 'will be* a. very good will be changed to lower number -of units. Greg Randall - Applicant's landscape architect Single- Family houses; described project. Ron Metzler - Golf Course Pro - Answered drainage, golf course design,, etc -: "be the best in Petaluma; one; Development Agreement and planner - 320 Detached questions regarding lakes, The public hearing was .continued to the Planning Commission meeting of September 26th, 1989. VI. GATTI NURSERY/LIBER,TY FARMS PREZONING, AP NO's 137 - 070 -16 and 137 - 060 -31, (File No. 3.394) . 1. Consideration of pre- zoning for two properties in Corona /Ely Specific Plan Area. R 439 (Commissioner Doyle excused herself from this discussion. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: None.The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Read to recommend to the City Council prezoning of the Gatti Nursery and Liberty Farms properties to Agriculture, subject to the findings listed below:-. COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE' - Abstain COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes Fin dinlg s : 1� The properties are within the boundaries of the Corona /Ely Specific Plan area and, as such, have been designated for eventual development in accordance with the Plan. 1. Prezoning to the Agriculture (,A) zoning district will permit the D existing agricultural operations to continue but recognizes that '? ultimate development must be in accordance with the Corona /Ely Specific Plan. 1. The prezoning is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare because it will permit eventual development to occur in an orderly and logical manner. I PLANNING MATTERS VII. INTERPRETATION 1. Discussion of tennis court as an accessory use in a residential zone. DISCUSSION: Cliff King - 1050 Rancho Lindo - no lights; 8 foot fence would be ok; all adjoining lots are oversized. Commissioner Balshak - If neighbors don't care, this is ok. Commissioner Bennett - Feels'.that this should be an administrative decision. Commissioner Parkerson - Swim_ ming pools and tennis courts should be treated the same;. Consensus - neighbors should be notified - fence should be treated as an accessory structure - no lights ADJOURNMENT 10:45 PM. 0 �, 5 1 PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION September 26, 1989 REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7 :00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 'ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Balshaw, Bennett *, Parkerson, Libarle, Read, Tarr COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Doyle STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter, Principal Planner * Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes. of September 12, 1989 were approved with corrections to pages '3 and 9. PUBLIC COMMENT (1.5 minutes maximum) . The Planning Commission will hear public comments only on matters over which they - have jurisdiction. There will be no Commission discussion. The Chairman will 'allot no more than five minutes to any individual. If more than three persons wish to speak, their time will be allotted so that the total amount of time allocated to this agenda 'item will be 15 minutes. Speakers Bob Martin - 171 Payran Street - attended Corps of Engineers Flood Meeting last night; channel ;sizing based on current land uses; (presented transparencies of flood channels) City may want to request larger easements COMMISSIONER COMMENT: None. CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from Van Bebber requesting continuance. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Status of Council appeals; Housing. Forum - October 18. COM'MISSIONER'S REPORT ;None. READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS Within fourteen (1,4) calendar days following` the date of a decision of the Planning Commission, the decision may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant or by any other interested party. If no appeal is made w'ith'in that time, the decision shall be final. An appeal shall be addressed to the Council in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The appeal shall state specifically the grounds for the appeal and the relief sought by the applicant. I f - OLD 3USINE'SS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS I. COUNTY VETERANS MEMORIAL BUILDING, McNEAR AVENUE AT PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH, AP NO. 008 - 471 -06 (File No. 8.102c). f 1: Continued consideration of Negative Declaration and General Plan r Amendment changing land use designation from Public and Institutional to Urban Standard Residential (up to 5 du /acre) on 1.4 acres of property located at the rear of the Veteran's Memorial Building. I. co This public hearing was closed at the Planning Commission Meeting of June 13, 1989. Discussion i Steve , Crook - 65 - Mission Drive - expected to be able to speak at this meeting - neighborhood will be appealing to the City Council; wants this property to be a park or tot lot. Planning Director Salmons - Parks and Recreation Committee will discuss this item in October. F A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Parker to recommend approval of a Negative Declaration for the proposed General Plan amendment based on the findings listed below. COMNiiISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIR "MAN BEI Findinigs : BALSHAW - Abstain DOYLE - Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSON - Yes READ - Yes TARR - Yes f NETT - Yes 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause 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 e'l'iminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 2. The project does not have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage C of long -term, environmental goals. 01 441 'j, 442 3. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project does not have environmental effects which_ will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 5. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goal's, and policies of the General Plan. 6. Future development of the site will require project- specific environmental review. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Parker;son to recommend to the City Council approval of the General Plan Amendment subject to the findings listed below. COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BE1\ BALSHAW - Abstain DO'YLE - Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSON - Yes READ - Yes TARR - Yes (NETT - Yes Findings 1. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest. 2. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent and compatible with the rest of the General. Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected. 3. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to be detrimental to the 'public health, safety, or welfare. 4. The proposed amendment has been processed in. accordance with the applicable provision's of the California Government Code and 'the California Environmenal Quality Act (CEQA) . II. CITY OF PETALUMA., FLOOD�VAY /FLOODP,LAIN- COMBINING, (FW /FP -C) GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS (File 8.116 and 3.396). 1. Continued consideration of Negative Declaration. 2. Consideration of amendments_. to General Plan . Land Use and Development Constraints Map . 3. Consideration of amendments to Zoning Map. 4. Consideration, of Floodway Zone Ordinance Text Amendment. (Commissioner Libarle reviewed the tape of this .item from the September 12 meeting.) 3 L M This public hearing was closed at the Planning Commission meeting of September 12, 1989. 2. The City's "no net fill "policy mitigates the effects of development or grading within the "Denman Flats" area to a level of insignificance. 3. The designation of certain properties located northwesterly of Old Redwood Highway as "Agricultural" further mitigates the effects of a reduced Floodway to a level of insignificance. 4. Because of the mitigations contained in findings 1 -3, the adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those properties removed from the floodway 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 5. Because of the mitigations contained in findings 1 -3, the adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those areas removed from the floodway does not have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals. 6. The adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning 4 Discussion None. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Read to recommend to the City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - .Absent COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Yes 0) COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMI18SIONER READ - Yes IE COMMIISSIONER TARR - Yes co CHAIRMAN BENNETT -Yes Findings 1, 1. Ail development or construction activity is subject to environmental review and City Floodway or Floodplain zone regulations. Petaluma Floodway and Floodplain zone regulations meet or exceed FEMA requirements. 2. The City's "no net fill "policy mitigates the effects of development or grading within the "Denman Flats" area to a level of insignificance. 3. The designation of certain properties located northwesterly of Old Redwood Highway as "Agricultural" further mitigates the effects of a reduced Floodway to a level of insignificance. 4. Because of the mitigations contained in findings 1 -3, the adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those properties removed from the floodway 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 5. Because of the mitigations contained in findings 1 -3, the adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those areas removed from the floodway does not have the potential to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals. 6. The adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning 4 MA categories for those areas removed from the floodway does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. 7. The adoption of FEMAts revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those areas removed from the floodway does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, because of the safeguard's incorporated in the Floodway /Floodplain ordinance and subsequent environmental review of development proposals. 8. The adoption of FEMA's revised flood hazard boundaries into the General Plan and Zoning Maps and designation of land use /zoning categories for those areas removed from the floodway are consistent with and further promote the objectives, goals, and policies of the General. Plan because the community has adequately regulated, land uses in flood -prone areas, required mitigation fees, and will continue to review development proposals in hazardous areas. 9. Failure to adopt (or significant delays in adopting,) the flood hazard zones will. threaten community welfare by jeopardizing citizen participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. A motion was- made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to recommend approval of amendments to the General Plan. Land Use and Development Constraints Maps to reflect revised Federal Insurance Rate Maps based on. the following findings: COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMM'ISS'IONER CHAIRMAN BE1\ Findings : BALSHAW - Yes DOYLE •- Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSON - Yes READ - Yes TA RR - Yes (NETT - Yes 1. The proposed amendments are deemed to be in the public interest because continued community participation in the NFIP will be assured, 2. The proposed amendments are consistent and compatible 'with the rest . of the General Plan and its implementation, 3. The potential impacts of the proposed ;amendment have been assessed and have been determined not to. be detrimental to the public health, safety, or ' welfare due to conformance with. FEMA studies, ,subsequent environmental review on all future development, and enforcement of the City's "no net fill" policy, and, 4. The requirements of California Environmental Quality Act and local environmental review guidelines have been satisfied and hereby incorporates by reference the Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by Resolution No. N.C.S. 5 1 r •- - r iirb r. i ..- .. MR A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Libarle to recommend to the City' Council approval of an Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S. by.: amending the Zoning Map Floodway and F1'oodplain District boundaries and designating zone districts for those properties removed from Floodway. COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Absent COMMISSIONER LIBARLE Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes co A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Read to recommend approval of an Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance [� No. 1072 N.C.S. , to clarify the area subject to "no net fill" policy. COMMI BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Absent COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes III. ADOBE CREEK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, PHASE II, EAST SIDE OF ELY BOULEVARD SOUTH, BETWEEN CASA GRANDE AND FRATES ROADS, (Files 6.923A, .3.363C) . 1. Continued consideration of Development Agreement amendment. 2. Continued consideration of rezoning from PCD to PUD and review of unit development plan for Phase II (267 detached single- family dwellings and .golf course) . 3. Continued consideration of tentative map for 267 detached single- family residential subdivision. This ,public hearing is continued from the September 12, 1989 Planning Commission meeting. Greg Randall - applicant architect - access to creek should not be encouraged; planting will be done next fall; median should be removed in three cul -de -sac entry areas to allow larger roadways for backing from driveways, etc.; answered questions regarding landscaping. Chuck,- McKee Applicant representative - Described floor plans; CC &R's have already been recorded for Phase I; would like to change review time from 60 to 30 days (prior to Final Map approval) . (Discussions on Development Agreement Amendment were continued to the Planning Commission Meeting of October 10, 1989; balance of public hearing was closed.) L 446 Discussion Planning Director Salmons Public] private nature of golf course should be further defined. Commissioner Read When will, revised Development Agreement be ready? Commissioner Tarr - Concerns with privacy for homes bordering golf course. Commissioner Libarle - Is .housing too close to the golf course? Commissioner Read - Would like assurances that there will be landscaping in interior of golf course. A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Parker.son to recommend approval of the rezoning of approximately 96 acres for the Adobe Creek Golf and Country Club Unit 2 project from P.C.D. to P.U.D. based on the following findings:: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BEI\ BALSHAW Yes DOYLE - Absent LIBARLE. - Yes PARKERSON - 'Yes READ - Yes T,ARR - Yes f'NETT - Yes Findings 1. The- proposed plan, clustering :residential units, with golf course open space surrounding,, 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. The proposed ,PUD is on property which has the ability to provide a suitable relationship to thoroughfares ('Ely Boulevard South, Frates and Casa Grande Roads) ; and that said thoroughfares: will be adequate to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. 3. The plan for the proposed development will present a unified and organized arrangement of residential units which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby properties and roadways and; - as conditionally recommended for approval, that adequate public and private area landscaping and screening will be included to insure compatibility. 4. The Scenic qualities of the improved site will be protected, with adequate available public and private spaces designated on the Unit Development Plan, through the provision of pathways along the frontages of Casa Grande and Frates Roads, and the dedication of permanent open space over the golf course area to 'insure perpetual preservation of urban separator open space. 5. The development of: 'the subject property, in the manner proposed and conditionally approved', will not be detrimental to the public: welfare, and will be in the best interest of the City. 7 44'7 6. That the proposed rezoning is in conformance with the general intent and spirit of the ,zoning regulations and the Petaluma General Plan by providing density in conformance with the site's land use designation; and further, that the public interest, convenience and general welfare will be furthered by the proposed amendment. 7. That the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines have been satisfied and hereby incorporates by reference the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report certified by the City Council in January, 1985. 8. That the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15091 are hereby satisfied by the incorporation of mitigation measures to address identified adverse impacts associated with the approved project. Those mitigation measures being set forth in conditions of approval for the unit development plan and tentative cc map for the Adobe Creek Golf and Country Club, Unit 2. A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to recommend approval of the Unit Development Plan for Adobe Creek;- Phase 2, subject to the amended conditions as follows: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BE1\ BALSHAW - Yes DOYLE - Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSON - Yes READ - Yes TARR. Yes [NETT - Yes Conditions 1. Consideration of the proposed amendment to the Development Agreement shall be concluded by the Planning Commission prior to the consideration of the PUD rezoning, PUD unit development plan and tentative map for Adobe Creek Unit 2 by the City Council. 2. The PUD development plan shall be expanded and /or amended, subject to SPARC review and approval, to incorporate maximum building envelopes to equal minimum setback restrictions. 3. The PUD development standards and project CC &R's (conditions, covenants and restrictions) for Unit 2, subject to City staff review and approval, shall izrcRrde incorporate references to the following development standards: a. Identification of options and /or restrictions applicable to homeowners for construction of either structural additions or associated improvements (decks, patios, spas, etc.) . b. Maximum residential building heights of two and one -half stories or 30 N C. Maximum lot coverage for principal dwelling and accessory improvements shall be limited to an area equivalent to the defined building envelope as reflected on the approved unit development plan. NOTE: Within this PUD, the building envelope shall mean the area contained within the required setbacks from perimeter property lines. d.. Minimum setbacks shall be as follows: Front: average 18' to garage door unless deemed, by City staff to require more to provide adequate maneuvering area. Side: 3' 'minimum to property line, 10' separation between adjacent residences. Rear: 12' minimum from rear -most plane of structure closest to rear property line. 4. e. Rebuilding and /or replacement of residential structures including fences, shall conform to the approved unit development plan. f. Garage conversions are prohibited.. g. Recreational vehicles must be stored off -site, or within the garage. h. Whether minor additions (decks, patios, greenhouses, spas, etc.) are permitted in conformance with PUD Development Standards. If proposed to be permitted, under what standards and /or .review processes? i. Whether structural additions are permitted. If permitted, are they subject to Homeowner's Association review and approval? If permitted, structural additions' shall be contained within the building envelope, as defined within this PUD and set forth on the approved unit development plan and subdivision map,. Design shall be in keeping with the approved PUD development plan. j. Home occupations are permitted subject to the regulations of -the Petaluma Toning Ordinance and any provisions of the project CC &R's. k. Accessory structures shall be permitted, subject to 'Homeowner Association review and approval, and shall be contained within the building envelope. Development standards for permitted accessory structures shall be prepared by the developer and subject to SPARC review and approval, prior to final map approval and recordation. 1. Parking enforcement program, subject to review and .approval by City Staff. All aspects of the proposed development plan are subject to - review by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of N M L a 'Final Map; including but not limited to: architecture, public and private landscaping (except golf course) , hardscape surface treatments, private Street identification signs, lighting fixtures, irrigation, public right -of -way pathways, project identification signs and fencing. Particular emphasis shall be given to: a. Provision of substantial landscaping along project's perimeter, including Casa Grande, Frates and Old Adobe Roads. b, Interior streetscape with substantial street tree planting, in excess of minimum standards typically seen., the intent being to make this Petaluma's "show- place" housing project C. Provision of screen planting adjacent to residential fences which abut golf course pathways. d. Provision of at least four off - street parking spaces for each residential unit, with adequate driveway width and length to afford safe maneuvering. 5. All landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting, walls, fences, etc., within the public right -of -way shall be maintained through an Assessment District, s- ubject to approval of the City Council concurrently with the approval of the Final Map. Costs associated with the formation of the assessment district shall be borne by the developer. Landscaping and irrigation systems within the public r, ght -of -way shall be designed to standards acceptable to the City of Petaluma and shall be operated by time - controlled devices designed to be activated during non- daylight hours. 6. All landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting and other improvements with in the private right -of -ways, within the project site, shall be maintained through a homeowner's association or other method, subject to City Council review and approval concurrently with the approval of the Final Map. 7. Streetscape landscaping and pathway treatment shall be extended beyond City limits lines to provide continuity of design, subject to SPARC review and approval. 8. Cut -de -sac paving pattern shall match the detail illustrated on the unit development plan (titled prototypical plan on the Illustrative Site Plan) , subject to SPARC review and approval. 9. Hours of construction activity on the Adobe Creek residential projects shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM., Monday through Saturday (non - holiday). 10. All applicable conditions to the original PCD approval, which are not amended by these actions, shall remain in force. 11. Public access and use of the course shall continue for 50 years from commencement of operations, unless reduced, modified, or extended by mutal consent of the City and Duffel or Duffel's successors in interest. 10 450 for public acces's shall run with the land and shall be L1.} V11 L111'1G1 QAiZl 160 111 -GL - GJL 631111 VWlll.l'J1llrJ• L1 motion was made by Commissioner Parkersori. and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to recommend approval of the Tentative .Map based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions as follows COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BEl\ Findings BALSHAW. - Yes DOYLE - Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSO`N -. Yes READ - Yes TARR - Yes NETT - Yes 1. The proposed subdivision, as conditionally approved', together with provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan objectives, policies, general land uses and programs. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed, as conditionally approved. 3. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements therefore, as conditionally approved, will not cause substantial environmental damage, and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or their habitat. 4.. The design of the Subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems. 5. The design of the Subdivision and the type of improvements proposed will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 6. 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 Control Board. 7. That the restriction to limited access for the Adobe `Creek channelw:ay contained within this project site - is due to the need to "insure public safety. It is assured that access' is retained for research and enhaneeme'nt projects such as the Casa Grande High School. 'hatchery. Conditions 1. Consideration of the proposed amendment to the Development Agreement shall be concluded by the Planning Commission prior to the consideration of the PUD rezoning, PUD unit development plan and tentative map for Adobe Creek Unit- 2 by the City Council. 2. Private street names shall' be subject to approval of the Petaluma Street Naming Committee. 11 45:1. 3. All restoration and enhancement work within the Adobe Creek channelway and along the top of bank shall be done in conformance with plans, reviewed, and approved by all appropriate regulatory agencies prior to issuance of a residential building permit within Unit No. 2. All restoration and enhancement work shall be undertaken in a timely manner, cognizant of restrictions of weather, but in no case shall completion of said improvements extend beyond December, 1990 or the completion of all residential units, whichever comes first. Substantial compliance, as deemed appropriate b City staff, shall be achieved by end (if summer 1990 4. Development fees applicable to this project shall be as set forth within 0) the revised Development Agreement. 5. A; revised PUD unit development plan exhibit, incorporating all details CO and conditions of approval which can be reflected in map form, shall be submitted within 60 days, of PUD and tentative map approval by the City Council, or prior to ' SPARC review, whichever occurs first. 6. Project CC &R's, signed and in recordable form, and homeowner's association bylaws shall be submitted 30 6e days prior to approval of a Final Map and shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development and Planning Department and City Attorney. Project CC &R's shall be signed and recorded with the Final Map. 7. The developer shall submit a plan for on -going routine cleaning of private streets and common parking areas prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Director. 8. The Tentative Map shall reflect minimum setback requirements set forth as PUD conditions of approval, subject to staff review and approval prior to Final Map consideration. 9. Transit bus -stop facilities shall be provided as deemed appropriate, by City staff and Sonoma County Transit, prior to Final Map review and approval by City Council. Improvements shall be completed concurrently with public improvements. 10. Golf course pathways between residential lots shall measure a minimum of 25' 36' in width with substantial screen planting against residential fences. 11. All applicable conditions to the original PCD approval, which are not amended, by these actions, shall remain in force. 12. The conditions of the City Engineer, as set forth below, shall be complied with.; aritk tht- �rceptirnr- v�on�litiorrs- b- arre�-t pertarrring - to r a dirt s- r e gzri r arrerrts for- private - s �reets -: a. Adobe Creek shall be maintained in a natural state and provisions made to accommodate flood flows, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 12 452 b-:--- �+ Fi nimYtrrr - rerrterl�re-- radir.cs -� �i�- sEreets= �rthrr:= t�ri -cievelopinent sha +l--b-e7- 399L --- Th -e t�tive -map-- shall- -bre--revisecl -to reflect -+his req- airement- C. A 25' minimum, back -up area is needed behind parking spaces of cul -de -sac, parking islands. Please show parking and back -up area (25 in Section C -C. Section D -D shows proper configuration of .parking and back -up maneuver areas. d. Two sets of water calculations. shall be required for this development. One set verifying the system adequacy (fire flows and domestic service,, pressure.) of Phase 1 and another set covering both Phases 1. and 2. e. If on- street parking is proposed along one side of Section A =A, the specific location shall be stated on ' the tentative map. f. "No Parking" shall. be designated along the remaining streets within this development except as proposed in the landscape parking islands and proposed parking pull -in areas. (Section D -D) . g. Any facilities for pedestrian and bike pathways shall be contained within a public access easement. h. The 20' dimension shown in Section C -C on the tentative map appears incorrect. This shall b be rechecked and corrected if necessary. i. The project shall comply with all applicable flood mitigation requirements adopted by the Ci Council as contained in Zoning Ordinance Article 16 and Municipal Code, Chapter 17.30 "Storm Drainage Impact Fee". j. The existing wastewater irrigation. force main and easement shall be shown on the tentative map or other appropriate mechanism,. k. All storm drain - pipes not draining a private street shall be private and maintained by the golf course. 1. The private streets, as shown on the tentative map, shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association or other appropriate mechanism. M. It is unclear if the clubhouse site, Lot A, is to be included within the, golf course area. If it is not, then it shall be labeled "remainder". If it is. to be considered a separate; lot than dimensions and area to the nearest 100 square feet stated along with access and utility services shown. n. All grading and erosion- control measures shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Ordinance No. 1576 NCS. o. Lot =to -lot and across property line drainage is not allowed. Provisions shall be made to catch this water before it crosses the adjacent property. p. The existing PG, &E easement adjacent to Frates Road shall be shown on the tentative map. q. All existing utilities (12KV lines and under) shall b be converted to underground facilities. r. Prior to the issuance of any building ,permits, lot pad elevations shall be certified by a Registered Civil Engineer.. S1. Handicapped ramps shall be provided at street corners with pedestrian access. ' t.---- Errgirreering-- Departnm -T N ha Yl --3-rfficieTrt-time- -the: prapnse�-- rero�simr�=- to-- tlre-- �rigirral-- -cievelopnnent-- - agreecnent ; 13 4 5'3 su�rrritted- �y-- DaffeP- FlcrmTsanq-- xnd;- �*_*�- R�* - oixr- �ocnmerrts -de not- reflec�arrSr- proposed= t�rarrge�o-�re --original- corrdi•ticrrs 13. The landscape medians within the three cul -de -sacs shall be shortened to: provide adequate access to residential driveways, subject to SPARC and City staff review and approval NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS IV. MARK ANTELL, BED AND BREAKFAST, 525 7th STREET, AP No. 008- 211 -19, (File No. 1.646) . 1, Consideration of Negative Declaration-. 2: Consideration of Conditional Use Permit to allow a bed and breakfast inn. co This public hearing was opened and the item was . continued to the Planning Commi'ssion meeting of October -10, 1989, to allow renoticing (applicant changed size of project V. VAN BEBBER, 729 PETALUMA BOULEVARD SOUTH, AP No. 008- 194 -04, (File No. 1.640). 1 Consideration of Negative Declaration. 2: Consideration of_ conditional use permit to allow existing steel fabrication facility and 7,000 sq.ft. warehouse addition. This public hearing was opened and continued (per applicant's request) to the Planning Commission meeting of October 24, 1989. VI. CONROW PROPERTY, ELLIS AND WASHINGTON (PETALUMA TOWN PLAZA) , (NORTHEAST CORNER) , AP No. 007 - 361 -27 & 30 (File NO. 1.648). 1. Consideration of Negative Declaration. 2. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit to allow a shopping center. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: John Hess - (First Western Development) - applicant - problems with setback at Washington Street; no sidewalk in front of building; heavy landscaping; asked for 28 foot setback (measured from property line) on Washington Street and 15 feet from rear property line.; TJKM (applicant's Engineer) working with City Traffic Engineer on egress /ingress on Ellis. The public hearing was closed. 14 454 Discussion Commissioner -'s Tarr/Parkerson - sidewalks should be provided. at this area; what is future development of this property? what is Zoning and General Plan designation? Commissioner Balshaw Agreed with above - should have bicycle path along the frontage from sycamore tree to Ellis Street. Commissioner Libarle - people might be encouraged to jaywalk if there was a sidewalk along East Washington frontage:. Commissioner Parkerson concerns about access from Ellis Street; must insure tree preservation. Commissioner Read - signag,e for this shopping center - setbacks are critical and should be adhered to; if sycamore tree on East Washington frontage dies., it should be replaced with another similar -sized tree. Commissioner Balshaw wants bikeway in front of this center on Washington. Commissioner: Bennett no guidelines on setbacks at gateway areas Commissioner Read - Wants visitor information kiosk on this site. A motion was made by Commissioner Parkerson and seconded by Commissioner Tarr to direct staff to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN BE1\ Findings BALSHAW - Yes DOYLE - Absent LIBARLE - Yes PARKERSON - Yes READ - Yes TARR - Yes f NETT - Yes 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 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 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. 15 4 55 5. The project, as conditionally approved, is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and policies of the General Plan. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Libarle to grant a conditional use permit based on the findings and subject to the amended conditions listed as follows: Conditions 1. Building A shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the Washington Street property line and. will include landscaping of a minimum of eight 8 feet of ri ht -of -wa . 30 -- feet - -from- -the-- secrt+lr- - Wa-s- hiTrgt= fz-cntztge - Propez'tS'`3i7re= final- Prope��tS'`3ine€ ter eation }- Building B shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the east (rear) property line (bordering the Martin - Shaffer residence) . 2. The existing sycamore tree shall be preserved and protected. The two existing Eucalyptus trees shall be preserved and protected if possible, as determined by SPARC. Method of protection shall be subject to SPARC review. 3. Although a higher ratio is encouraged, a minimum of 1 parking space per 300 sq.ft. of gross floor area shall be provided. 4. In order to provide more parking, up to 300 of the spaces shall be compact. 5. Parking shall be relocated and replaced with landscaping so that no spaces are located in the 10 foot front setback (Ellis Street) . 6. A total of three handicap spaces shall be provided, one of which must be designed to accommodate side - loading vehicles. 7. Prior to SPARC review of the project, the applicant shall submit proof to the satisfaction of City staff that the existing access easement (north of site) does not preclude development of the site as proposed. 16 COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Absent COMM'IpSSIONER LIBARLE - Yes COMMISSIONER PARKERSON = Yes CV COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes Findings { 1. The proposed use, subject to the conditions of approval conforms to the intent and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, and the General Plan. 2. This project will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community due to the mitigation measures incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. Conditions 1. Building A shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the Washington Street property line and. will include landscaping of a minimum of eight 8 feet of ri ht -of -wa . 30 -- feet - -from- -the-- secrt+lr- - Wa-s- hiTrgt= fz-cntztge - Propez'tS'`3i7re= final- Prope��tS'`3ine€ ter eation }- Building B shall be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the east (rear) property line (bordering the Martin - Shaffer residence) . 2. The existing sycamore tree shall be preserved and protected. The two existing Eucalyptus trees shall be preserved and protected if possible, as determined by SPARC. Method of protection shall be subject to SPARC review. 3. Although a higher ratio is encouraged, a minimum of 1 parking space per 300 sq.ft. of gross floor area shall be provided. 4. In order to provide more parking, up to 300 of the spaces shall be compact. 5. Parking shall be relocated and replaced with landscaping so that no spaces are located in the 10 foot front setback (Ellis Street) . 6. A total of three handicap spaces shall be provided, one of which must be designed to accommodate side - loading vehicles. 7. Prior to SPARC review of the project, the applicant shall submit proof to the satisfaction of City staff that the existing access easement (north of site) does not preclude development of the site as proposed. 16 W. 8. Curb cut or other means of retaining potential for access to Martin- Shaffer- property (.existing access easement) shall be provided. 9. Owner authorization shall be obtain_ ed for any off -site improvements to ,private property prior to issuance of building permit. 10. Development of this site shall be subject to SPARC review with particular emphasis on the following: a. Multi -pane windows and column effect shall be wrapped. beyond the tower feature or other comparable architectural enhancement provided (east elevation of Building B where visible from Washington) ; b. Man doors on. the east elevation ('Building B) shall be recessed and substantially framed; C. Landscaping shall be provided against buildings wherever possible; d. Landscaping plans . for the median island and the Phase 2 area shall be submitted. with SPARC application and shall include plantings against the north elevation of Building B; e. All trees provided `along the Washington Street frontage shall be Specimen size (minimum 24" box) ; f., Landscaping, shall be provided along the access easement and along the east property line-to serve as a buffer (noise, light and glare) for the adjoining residential uses. .Placement and species shall be selected to provide maximum buffering. g. Recycling facilities'; h. Sign program (to include any monument signs and those designed to "provide tourist information and/or impart a sense of gateway entry into the community.") i. Adequacy of tower feature and, architecture for Gateway treatment. Provision of adequate access for deliveries. :. Provision of a bike [pedestrian path _along the Washington Street frontage, from Ellis Street • to the Washington Street entry drive. 11,. Property owner shall be responsible for maintenance of landscaping in the public right of way in perpetuity. 12. :Right -of -way improvements shown on, plans shall be installed by developer, subject to variations if required by City staff. 13. There shall be no open storage of equipment, materials, trash, litter or packaging. 14. The use permit for the shopping center does not include automatic approval for other or future uses which are not permitted uses within the underlying zoning district including fast food restaurants. Conditional uses as specified by the Zoning Ordinance for this district shall obtain a use permit prior to commencement of the use. 15. All requirements of the Engineering Department shall be complied. with, including: 17 457 a. Unless it can be justified to City staff by the applicant, the a: Buildings A & B require sprinklers. b,. Show site drainage and location of utilities. 18. The project sponsor shall comply with all applicable flood mitigation requirements adopted by the City Council, as contained in Zoning Ordinance Article 16, and Municipal Code Chapter 17.30 "Storm Drainage Impact Fee." } 9--- Aly7lic ant -- sha }b- V- drticips e-- -oir --a- -- fair -- share basis --in- -may -- future a s s e s s mt rrt• - d i stz�i c t s - -crr- -o t 1-r e r - ftnrd7rrg - nreciran ism s - �rnmeri - to- �m prov e area wide- 41ordirrg-- traffic - corrg-es an -or Yrt+rer- stxbregiaonal• rob }ems -for E. driveway on Ellis (closest to Washington,) shall be eliminated. b. The Ellis Street access via the easement shall be widened to 36 feet with two egress (left and right turn lanes) and one ingress (plans on file with the Planning Department) . c.. Curb, gutter and sidewalk to City Standards shall be installed /repaired on Ellis Street. d. Handicap ramps are required at the corner of East Washington and Ellis and both sides of the 36' entrance." e. Adjustments to curve radii and the deceleration lane may be required. f. Utilities fronting or traversing the site shall be undergrounded in accordance with the Municipal Code. g. Site distance problems at the 36' access may necessitate red curb in the area to the north (now used for diagonal parking) . 16. All requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be complied with, including: a Building shall be protected by an automatic fire extinguishing system as required by section 10.208A of the 1985 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code. b. Permit required from Fire Marshal's Office for sprinkler system alteration prior to work being started. Two sets of plans are required. C. Permit required for alarm system, prior to installation. di. Provide electrical conduit from post indicator valve to alarm panel location for tamper switch as underground is being installed. e. Check valve in Fire Department connection to be installed above grade. f: Two inch clearance shall be provided around fire sprinkler lateral and riser at foundation and floor slab. g;. Provide KNOX box for key control located on building as required by the Fire Marshal. h -. Provide fire hydrants as shown on plan (on file in the Fire Marshal's Office). i Building shall conform to Article 81 of the 1985 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code. j. Provide fire extinguisher 2 A rated A B C dry chemical type as required by the Fire Marshal." 17. All requirements of the Building Division shall be complied with, including: a: Buildings A & B require sprinklers. b,. Show site drainage and location of utilities. 18. The project sponsor shall comply with all applicable flood mitigation requirements adopted by the City Council, as contained in Zoning Ordinance Article 16, and Municipal Code Chapter 17.30 "Storm Drainage Impact Fee." } 9--- Aly7lic ant -- sha }b- V- drticips e-- -oir --a- -- fair -- share basis --in- -may -- future a s s e s s mt rrt• - d i stz�i c t s - -crr- -o t 1-r e r - ftnrd7rrg - nreciran ism s - �rnmeri - to- �m prov e area wide- 41ordirrg-- traffic - corrg-es an -or Yrt+rer- stxbregiaonal• rob }ems -for E. 458 wiriclz-- deti-elopnreir�- of -this - propertq - -i -- fearrd-- to --be= - -corm batiYr9 facto�. 19. 20 7 Major Traffic Facilities Improvement Fees: The project sponsor shall, prior to issuance of a building permit., pay a fee of $50.00 per daily trip end estimated to be generated by said project. Trip generation figures 'shall be as determined by the City Engineer. If the City establishes a Major Facilities Traffic Mitigation fee prior to issuance of a building permit, the fee for said project shall thereinafter be either $50.00 per trip end or the major facilities traffic mitigation fee. 20. -2-1- Construction activities shall comply with applicable zoning ordinance and municipal code performance standards (noise, , dust, odor, etc.). 21. In addition to Storm Drainage Impact and Traffic Mitigation, Community Facilities Development Fees shall be applicable to this project. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING VII. SIGN ORDINANCE REVISION'S, SHOPPING CENTERS (File 7.119) . 1. Consideration of Negative Declaration. 2. Consideration of - Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments affecting shopping center sign regulations. This item was not presented at this .meeting.. It will be renoticed and heard at a later meeting. PLANNING 'MATTERS INTERPRETATIONS: VIII. TRUE VALUE HARDWARE, NORTH MCDOWELL AT COMMERCE (NORTHWEST CORNER) , AP No. 007 - 630 -01. 1. Appeal of Planning Director's interpretation concerning development of retail hardware store in light industrial zone. DISCUSSION Alan Henderson - 78,6.2 Mon.tero - Rohnert Park - described plans for business; wants to limit sales to $15.00 minimum; out of area sales will be by UPS; other deliveries kept local; other businesses in area sell retail; would like to be open on Saturday; existing True Value would probably close. DisCl ssign Commissioner' Parkerson - 'Should the zoning in this area be changed? Comi ssioner Balshaw. - This item should be sent to City Council. 19 459 Commissioner Read - How can this use be policed? A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Read to deny the appeal, upholding the administrative decision to deny the project and supporting staff findings of inconsistency with the Industrial land use designation and zoning for the site, based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Absent COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Yes (� COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - No co Findings for True Value 1. The project, as proposed, does not conform to the requirements and intent of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance with respect to permitted uses within the ML Zoning District. 2. The project, as proposed, does not conform to the requirements, intent, policies, and provisions of the General Plan as they relate to properties designated for Industrial use. 3. The proposed use is not consistent with the nature and character of other permitted uses for the site. IX. BENSON /MAHONEY, BILLBOARD RELOCATION 1, Discussion of regulations regarding relocation of existing non- conforming use (billboard) . (Commissioner Bennett abstained.) J DISCUSSION: Harold, Mahoney - Sign is being obscured by redwood tree growth - wants to move sign elsewhere on same property. Commissioner Read - A new billboard will be allowed for the auto center. Commissioner Libarle - Billboard should be allowed to be moved. Commissioner- Read - Billboard should not be allowed to be moved. Commissioner- Tarr - Should not move sign. A motion was made by Commissioner Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Read to deny request to relocate an existing non- conforming use (billboard), based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Absent COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - No COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes HE COMMISSIONER READ - Yes COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Abstain Findings 1. The City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance does not permit an outdoor advertising sign to be relocated if it is to be viewed from a main traveled roadway of a landscaped freeway. 2. The City of Petaluma Zoning Ordinance does not allow a non- conforming use to be moved to a different portion of a lot except to make. it conforming. 3. Relocating this billboard will not make it conforming. 4. General Plan Policy 14 states that the number of billboards shall be reduced. ADJOURNMENT 11 :00 PM. 1 2.1