Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/12/1985243 Not Official Until Approved By The Planning Commission MINUTES Petaluma Planning Commission . March 12, 1985 Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m. City Council Chambers Petaluma, California PRESENT: Commissioners Head Hilligoss, Read, Serpilio, Sobel, Tencer ABSENT: Commissioner Libarle STAFF; Warren Salmons, Planning Director Mike Moore, Principal Planner Pamela Tuft, Principal- Planner: Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner-,: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes from the February 26 meeting were approved wit the following change: Page 5, No. 19 changed to read: "The roof color or reflectivity shall be modified to reduce glare, subject to SPARC approval. " CORRESPONDENCE: None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Council reports distributed by Warren Salmons. COMMTSSIONERS' REPORT Commissioner Read thanked the , staff for making the seminar arrangements in Santa Clara. Commissioner's Sobel - and Hilligoss reported on the City entrance/ exit sign meeting. NOTE: Strike -Out Type ( - - - -) = Deletion Underline Type ( ) = Addition PUBLIC HEARINGS I. ALAN ROSENBERG, 14 UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION, 1302 HOLM ROAD (file 6.608) A.P. #007 - 593 -06. il 1. Consideration of tentative map. Public hearing was opened, SPEAKERS: None. Public 'hearing was closed. 1 244 A. motion was made by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner f.Sobel, to recommend to -the City Council approval of the tentative map based on the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. ,.AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) Findings 7. 1 w .. The proposed subdivision, together with provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan 2.; The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in said General 'Plan. 3' The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5 The design of the Subdivision and the proposed improvements therefor will cause substantial - environmental damage, and no substantial or avoidable injury will occur to fish or wildlife or' 'their habitat. 6. The design of the Subdivision and the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems. 7. 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. 8. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing community sewer system will not result in violation of the existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Conditions 1. The project shall comply with all applicable Building /Fire Code regulations. 2. The Project shall comply with all site improvements as required by the Site Plan and Architectural Review- Committee .(SPARC) : ' �k 3. The project shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Building Inspector resulting from the completion of an inspection of the site (cost to be borne by the applicant) for possible health and safety violations and /or building code violations prior to approval of the final map. II. VALLEY ORCHARD APARTMENTS, 69 UNIT EXPANSION, 2,100 EAST WA_SHING'TON STREET (file ;1.365) A.P. #007- 510 -44. - 1. Consideration of E,. I. Q. 2. Consideration of Use Permit. 41 1 2 245 The public. hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Alan Baldwin - Valley Orchard Apartments - answered questions and supplied information. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner Sobel to recommend that the Commission direct the Planning Department to prepare and post a negative declaration for Phase II construction of sixty -nine units based on the findings in the staff report. 0) AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) c Findings co 1. The project as conditionally , approved does not have the potential . to substantially degrade -the quality of the environment, substantially reduce : the habitat 'of. fish or wildlife species; cause a fish- or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten or 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 environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. 3. The project as conditionally approved does not have possible environmental effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. 4. The environmental effects of this project as conditionally approved will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or, indirectly. 5. Any environmental effects of this project have been mitigated to an acceptable level by incorporation of use permit conditions. A motion was made by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner Sobel to recommend that the Planning Commission grant the use permit per the findings and conditions listed in the staff report as amended. AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) Findings 1. The proposed use will conform to the requirements and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan /EDP. 2. The use will not constitute a nuisance or-be detrimental to _the public welfare of the community. 3 M Conditions 1. The two parcels involved in the over-all- project shall be designated, by deed restriction to remain in single ownership. Said restriction shall be prepared and recorded prior to building permit issuance to insure continuity of common facilities. 2. On -site drainage systems shall be reviewed and approved by staff in conjunction with' the building permit review process. 3. Appropriate striping and signing shall be completed to ,identify =the Class II bikeway along Ely Blvd. 4. Use of the proposed facility shall be limited to a senior citizens retirement center. A recordable deed restriction shall be prepared by the proponent, subject to review and approval by the :City. Attorney, to limit residency to those 62 years of age or older except for live -in manager, if any. Said document shall be recorded' prior. to issuance of y_ . building permit. 5.- The project shall be subject to. SPARC approval with _all. - conditions of approval becoming conditions of the use permit. To the extent possible, covered_ walkways between _the. two complexes to be provide subject to 'SPARC approval 6. Project is subject to flood mitigation fees. III. LYONS RESTAURANT, 732 EAST WASHINGTON ST. (file 8,96, 1.4'60,3,337) A.P. #'s 7 -063- 10.12,43 and 44. 1. Consideration of E.I.Q. 2. Consideration of General Plan Amendment.. F 3. Consideration of Rezoning. 4. Consideration of Use Permit. The public hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Marvin Alldaffer - Vice President, Lyons Restaurants Mr. Decarli - property owner speaks re: houses to be relocated. The public hearing is closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner Read to recommend approval of a negative declaration for this project. AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) A motion was made by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner Tencer to :recommend to the City Council approval of an amendment to the General. Plan /EDP changing the designation of A.P. #7 - 063 -12 from residential to central urban commercial. 4 AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ..ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) A motion was made by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissioner Head to recommend to the City Council that it approves rezoning of A.P. #7 - 063 -12 from residential compact to neighborhood commercial. AYES: 6 1 NOES: 0 ABSENT: l ( Libarle ) A motion was made by Commissioner Head and', seconded by Commissioner Head and seconded by Commissioner Read to approve. the use permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff reports' as amended. AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1(Libarle) 1. AP No's. 7- 063 -12, 10, 43 and 44 shall be merged before issuance of building permits. 2. 'Use Permit to be reviewed annually received regarding . operation -of - the• non - compliance with the conditions of brought to the Commission's attention. 3. The permitted hours of operation of th per day. by staff. If complaints ' are restaurant, or if staff finds approval, the matter will be e restaurant shall be 24 hours a, The permitted hours for truck delivery and garbage pick -up shall be: 8 AM to 8 PM daily. bs The garbage dumpster /compactor shall not be used after 9 PM or before 8 AM. 4. A regular twice -daily litter pick -up shall be conducted by employees covering the - restaurant premises and neighboring properties in the vicinity. 5. aperating- -lTmrs ant1 - - si grrs is a rrL�ai necP art the - entrarr�.�es Ytoti ng bpera4ing -lrotrrs . ,.'4 6. fixthority - -Ara l -+m-- granted --bT- the - property- oamer. -te --t amity- police d�partnteirt- -to -- perm rt-- tire- -po}ice -� - errter- -the- site- chzring- txnrrs- -ef Herr oper° atien- 4' er- P� 'P���F'ntnrlr- axi9`ie'iteririg 5. All on -site lighting shall be directed to prevent direct lighting of any adjacent residential property. 6. A sound baffle wall shall be installed on the south and west property boundaries in order to reduce noise impacts on the adjoining residences. The wall shall be designed and located to the approval of -SPARC. 5 NM 7. The proposed site plan, including parking circulation, landscaping and other related design features shall be subject to review by SPARC and shall meet all current City design standards. 8. All planting shall be maintained in good growing • condition. Such - maintenance shall include, where appropriate, . pruning, . mowing, weeding, cleaning of debris ' ' and trash, fertilizing ' and regular watering. Whenever necessary, planting_ shall be replaced with -other plant materials to insure continued compliance with applicable landscaping requirements. Required irrigation systems shall be fully maintained in sound operatirAg condition with heads periodically cleaned* and replaced when missing to • insure 'continued regular watering of landscape areas, and health and vitality of landscape materials. 9. If they are to be demolished, the` houses on lots 10 and 12, shall be first offered to Burbank Housing' or other appropriate non profit housing organization then offered to the general public to be relocated rather - than demolished. If " the houses shall be so offered for: a - sixty day period following Commission action on the matter. IV. SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, LEONARD JAY AND T. DEVELOPMENT INC., 115 SYCAMORE LANE (file 3.31,,'8.90,' .31, ' 8.90, 11.79 A.P. 048 - 141 -46. 1. Consideration. of E.I.Q. 2. Consideration of. General'. Plan ..Amendment. 3. Consideration of Prezoning. The public' hearing was opened. SPEAKERS: Emil Mogel- Mogel Engineering, applicant representative- comments re: drainage, runoff., The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Sobel to recommend to the City Council that a mitigated negative declaration. be adoped subject to the findings listed in the staff report as amended. AYES: 6 'NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Libarle) Findings a. 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 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. 0 b. The project does not have the potential' to achieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals. c. The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. d. The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. e.. A geological engineering study will be done for City review concurrent with tentative subdivision map review process. 00 f. A ;contribution toward the ultimate construction of a traffic signal at 4 ;T the Sycamore /Shasta /N. Petaluma Boulevard intersection in the amount U equal to this. development's pro -rata share will be required as a condition of tentative subdivision map approval. g. Ar,174nvitiroe- i ding- - cl airi ge-- adegtzacy -bq- t+re-- Sononrr -Got - -W- ter . flgerrcy -ice ega red- prior- ta- Fritp- focrnci�- actirnr --orr -sit afirnr:=As a `mitigation measure for the Sonoma County Water Agency's comment that "review of our records indicates that the drainage system in the Sycamore and Shasta Avenue area was designed based on General Plan densities. Amending the General Plan to residential densit of ten units per acre could possibly make that drainage system less- than adequate. After reviewing the present design calculations, the, system would be marginal. based on the current General Plan" , a positive finding of drainage adequacy by the Sonoma .County Water , gency is required prior to Citv Council action on site general plan amendments. h. All feasible mitigation measures recommended by environmental consultants shall be incorporated in development design or conditions of approval of the tentative subdivision map. A motion was made by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissione- Read to, recommend to the City Council approval of . the urban General Plan use designation based on the. findings that such developments is consistent with, and future the intent of, the General Plan /EDP goals policies and programs. AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 .(Libarle) f� A motion was made by Commissioner Read and seconded by Commissioner Sobel to recommend to the City Council prezoning of the project site to R-1-5,000, based on the two finding in the staff report. j AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1(Libarle) Findings 1. The proposed amendment is in general conformity with the Petaluma General Plan and any applicable Environmental Design Plans. f1 250 2. The public necessity, convenience and general welfare require or clearly permit the adoption of the proposed amendment. PLANNING MATTER: DISCUSSION ITEM: Commission consideration of options for Zoning Ordinance amendments to revise phase -out of nonconforming use 'regulations. (Response Ito Commission directive regarding appeal of administrative decision_ .in the case of Steven Shain and re- establishment of non -use at 1102' Petaluma Blvd. North. The: Commission indicated an interest, at the December 11th meeting, in pursuing options to amend the zoning ordinance. In this regard, by consent, the Commission directed staff to ,prepare a zoning text amendment < „<. to: allow continuation and reestablishment of residential 'use in the CH Zone t %p, as' a conditional use if occupied by the business owner/ caretaker. Discussions regarding future study sessions. ADJOURNMENT: 9:30 pm 1 8