Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/28/1989rV �? PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION November 28., 1989 REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, 7 :00 p.m. CITY CO-U_.NCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIF. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS. Balshaw, Bennett *, Doyle, Parkerson, Tarr COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Read., Libarle STAFF Warren Salmons, Planning .Director Pamela. Tuft, Principal Planner Jenny Cavanagh, Assistant Planner * Chairman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of November 14, 1989 were corrected. 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 . COMMISSTONER COMMENT: None. CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Self- Storage requesting continuance. DIRECT.OR'S REPORT New Associate Planner (Housing) has been hired - Bonne Gaebler will begin on. December 1`8. COMMIS'SION'ER'S REPORT None. READING OF APPEAL RIGHTS: Read. OLD 'BU'SINESS CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS I. EXXON, 5.15.3 .OLD REDWOOD HIGHWAY, AP NO. 47- 211 -16, (File No. 2.389). 1. Consideration of variance to permit retention of illegal non - conforming free- standing sign. 1 491 The public hearing was continued. SPEAKERS: Bob Reed - Robert Lee Assoc. , Consultant - Explained why sign should be allowed to remain; answered questions. JoBeth Folger - 2300 Clayton Blvd., Exxon Engineer - Answered questions; explained history from Exxon's point of view; Exxon having not granted authority to contractor to agree to conditions of sign permit; removal of sign will hurt business. Mike Kriudsmen - Station owner - was Texaco dealer - now owned by Exxon - sign cannot be removed if station is to survive; answered questions; did not see building permit; would not have agreed to removing sign. Commission Discussion: Commissioner Parkerson - Cannot make findings for variance per Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Tarr - Cannot make findings for variance. Commissioner Bennett - Sign Ordinance is clear that sign is in violation; will vote: for denial. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner' Tarr and seconded by Commissioner Doyle to: deny a request for variance for a free- standing sign based on the findings ; as follows: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes Findings 1) There are no peculiar or unusual conditions inherent in the property. 2) That any hardship was in fact created by the owner /leasee. 3) That 'this variance is not necessary, for the preservation of substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the Zoning District and 4) That ,granting this variance will in fact materially impair the purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. II. FOUNDRY WHARF DOCKS,, SECOND AND "H" STREETS, AP NO's 008= 194 -29, 30 and 31, (File 1.650). 1. Continued consideration of EIQ and Conditional Use Permit to allow 375 feet of floating docks on the Petaluma River at the Foundry Wharf. 2 l: 1 .. This public hearing was closed at the Planning Commission meeting of October 10, 1989. A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to direct :staff to ,prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the following findings: COMMIS'STONER BALSHAW - Yes COMMISSIONER 'DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER .LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMIS'S +IONER READ - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - 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 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 Tong -term, environmental goals. 3 The 'project, as. conditionally approved, does not have impacts which are individually limited,. but cumulatively considerable. 4. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental effects which will cause- substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 5. The project is consistent with and further promotes the objectives, goals, and' policies of the General Plan. A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by 'Commissioner Parkerson to approve. a Conditional Use Permit based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed below: COMMISSIONER BALSH-AW - Yes COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Absent COMMISSSO'NER TARR - Yes CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes 3 / U LIMAM Findinga : 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 C (Parking Area) 1. Parking lot shall be revised to comply with City Standards, subject to SPARC review and approval. 2. Access easements shall be provided for the existing residences (south side of 2nd Street) and for the VanBebber property, design and location subject to SPARC review and approval. 3. The transition between the public street and the private lot shall be shown on plans submitted for SPARC review and shall be subject to approval by the Engineering Department. (from previous staff report) : 4. Validity of this use permit is contingent upon final approval by FEMA and the US Army Corps of Engineers. 5. Validity of this use permit is contingent upon the provision of parking at a minimum ratio of one space per boat slip. The existing 275 feet of dock shall be deemed to have six boat slips. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit for building E (live -work units) or for the additional 100 feet of dock, an irrevocable offer of dedication for easement purposes shall be reviewed and approved by City staff. The easement shall meet the following requirements, subject to staff approval: a. An open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement shall be provided along, the Petaluma River frontage across this site. The easement shall be the area claimed, by the State Land Commission or a minimum width. of 30 feet, whichever is greater. Due to the location of the existing building 'the easement shall allow continuous access around the west rather than the river side of the building and need not have a constant minimum width of 30 feet. b. The intent of the open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement is to create a continuous pedestrian easement along the riverfront. Barriers to pedestrian circulation, such as fences (not buildings), shall be removed at such time as the offer of dedication is accepted by the City of Petaluma. 4 c,. The offer of dedication for an open space /pedestrian and river maintenance easement shall be submitted to City staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. The City will not accept the offer of dedication until either 10 years from City approval of this use permit or until a substantial public access corridor is available for dedication, whichever occurs first. 7. Prior staff approval shall be obtained for any trash or sanitation facilities and for any use except the dock itself (i.e. ancillary services, sale of products, etc.) . 8. Live- aboard residential uses shall be prohibited. 9. At no time shall future business activities exceed Performance Standards specified in the Uniform Building Code, Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance, and the 1987 General Plan.. 10. No storage of any type shall take place outdoors. 11. This use permit •may - be recalled to the Planning Commission at any time due to complaints regarding objectionable operating characteristics. At such time, the Commission may add modified conditions of approval. NEW B'USINESS' PUBLIC HEARING: III. PETALUMA SELF- STORAGE, 945 PETALUMA BLVD. NORTH, AP No. 006 - 450 -18, (File 1.652) . 1. Consideration of EIQ . 2. 'Consideration of a conditional use permit to allow a 40., 000 sq. ft. self- storage facility ('800. individual units ranging in size from 25 to 150 sq.. ft.) with caretaker's residence. The applicant requested a continuance. After some discussion,. Commission decided to hear this item at this meeting. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS Eleanor Mitchell - Applicant representative surprised by staff report recommending denial; not prepared tonight to present response to staff:'s recommendations,; this use would not cause high = volume traffic; use is a permitted conditional use'; will be attractive, good residential neighbor; compatible, quiet use with residential surrounding uses; landscaping will be lush and well maintained. Victor DeCarli Wilson Street owns property near proposed project shouldn't: ,have self- storage on main throughfare:; does not fit on Petaluma Blvd. North. J 5 495 Charley_Osburn - .Representative of property owner - This property is very narrow, not many uses can fit on this site; feels project would be beneficial to City. COMMISSION DISCUSSION Commissioner Tarr - Would like to grant continuance. Commissioner Balshaw - Feels applicants should receive staff reports sooner than they do now mailed Thursday before meeting) . Commissioner Doyle - Staff should relate to applicants that Commission does not look favorably on continuance requests unless need is urgent. Feels this uses is inappropriate for site. Commissioner Balshaw - Does not need to hear more discussion - changed mind during applicant presentation - does not see much problem with project at this location; could be pleasant addition to Petaluma Blvd. North. Commissioner Parkerson - Not proper use at this site. Commissioner Bennett - Agrees with Commissioner Parkerson - land use inappropriate: project is attractive, but land use is inappropriate; does not feel enough discussion on what will happen in this area has been held. Commissioner Balshaw - Too much traffic at this site on Pet. Blvd. North already;; this project would fit in now. Commissioner Bennett - No specific set of rules for development of this area. Commissioner Balshaw - Self- storage projects are becoming more attractive - low- intensity land use, not a high traffic use. Commissioner Tarr - applicant has pointed out that this use is located near to potential users; finds this use compatible. Commissioner Parkerson - Concerns with GP designation - use not compatible; use is better located off of a major throughfare. Commissioner Balshaw - Use is nearly the same as on McDowell. Commissioner Bennett - Failure to focus on issue of land use of this area. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Doyle and seconded by Commissioner Parkerson to deny a conditional use permit based on the following findings: COMMISSIONER BALSHAW - No COMMISSIONER DOYLE - Yes COMMISSIONER LIBARLE - Absent COMMISSIONER PARKERSON - Yes COMMISSIONER READ - Absent COMMISSIONER TARR - No CHAIRMAN BENNETT - Yes Findings 1. The proposed use at the proposed location does not conform to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance in that the ' standards and considerations governing conditional uses render the use inappropriate at this location. 2. The proposed use at this location does not conform with the General Plan in that it will not offer utilization of the mixed use site to its. M 49 6 fullest and most compatible manner given the developments. DISCUSSION ITEMS IV. 1. Bed and breakfast (Commercial vs. 'Residential zone) . Shopping center occupancy criteria.. surrounding Item 1 Discussion Should Zoning Ordinance be revised to allow more than 5 -guest rooms in commercially zoned Bed and Breakfast Inns on a case by case basis? Commission concerns supported. this amendment. This item will be brought, back with other Zoning, Ordinance amendment requests. Item 2 Discussion Commissioner .Parkerson felt projects should be complete before a� stores can open. Commissioner Tarr felt that procedures should be kept as they are. Commissioner Bennett felt that current policy was ok, but that the Gateway Center project (Lucky store) was allowed to open earlier than it should have. Staff agreed to require safe site conditions and direct parking availability before allowing occupancy even with appropriate bonding. ADJOURNMENT 8 :55 PM El I 7