HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09/10/1985-Not Official Until .Approved,.
By: 'The :Planning;_Commission _ -
-MINUTES'
Petaluma Planning Commission September 10, 1985
Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m.
City Council Chambers, Petaluma,, California
PRESENT: Commissioners Head, Hilligoss, Libarle, .Read., Sobel, Woolsey
AB 'Commissioner Serpilio
STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director
.Pamela 'Tuft, Principal Planner'
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the August 27, `1985 meeting were
.approved with tminor corrections to 'pages 1 an d 3. (Page 1, Approval of
"Minutes of August 13, 1985 now reads:. "....Mr. Lieb was willing to delete or
reduce the existing wall signs on McDowell."); (Page 3, 2nd motion -now
reads: "...until such time -:as further information on areas of drainage,
:airport, traffic consistency with General 'Plan and the cumulative effects of
all. residential .projects in the area with regard to the - above issues can be
supplied by staff." -
CORRESPONDENCE None.
DIRECTOR_'S REPORT`: A brief. overview of the General ,Plan Coordinating
ommittee meeting. was given. Forum 101 and Transportation Forum meeting
'brochures were given to the Commission,. It was announced that the League
of California Cities would be holding their upcoming annual conference in
San Francisco.
COMMISSIONERS' REPORT: None.
NOTE: Strike -Out Type ( - - - -) Deletion
Underline Type ( ) = Addition
PUBLIC HEARING'
I. MCBAIL COMPANY, SPRING MEADOWS V, GARFIELD AND
APPALOOSA, AP No. 136 - 060 -47 and 48 (3.346, 6.664) .
1. Continued consideration of rezone to PUD and development plan,
2. Continued consideration of tentative map for 92 single family
dwelling: /lot subdivision.
The public .hearing was continued from the August 27, 198'5 meeting.
SPEAKERS: Mike 'Gallagher McBail Company; 'gave a short presentation
1
_351
and history of Spring Meadows projects.
Commissioner Head questioned. Mr. Gallagher re: housing
in -lieu requirements.
Dick Hernandez 2047 Weatherby Way - general remarks
against building by McBail (,and Duffel) .
Mary Carlin - 26 Palomino Ct. - traffic problems on Ely,
1. concerns regarding, disaster- plan for airport.
Richard Bannister - 2033 Caulfield - concerns re: housing
near airport, water pressure concerns.
Les Ruh - City Engineer - answers questions re: water
pressure.
Joan Poe - 6.08 Garfield - concerns re: density of homes.
Barbara Keiper - 2012 Appaloosa - concerns re: Washington
Creek- maintenance, flooding, traffic and other
environmental effects. -�
Wayne Schwar - 600 Garfield Dr. distributed copies of I
his talk to the Commissioners, concerns re: East of Ely
EIR inadequacy. in areas of 'safety, recreation; noise,
hydrology; feathering needs more discussion; said that
he was speaking for the 380 people who signed petition
against building.
Alan Jones - Sonoma County Residents for Sane Land Use -
concerns re: avigation easements, ALUC transition zone
density.
Tim Hadadd - Planning consultant representing East _
Petaluman's For Controlled. Growth .and .Sonoma County
Residents for Sane Land Use - CEQA inconsistency;
asked that record reflect that the Planning Commission
does not have copy of the .East of Ely EIR.
John Hemingway - 1933 St. Augustine; concerns re: airport
noise;:
David Coe 608 Garfield; Concerns re: EIR adequacy.
Comments re: 1971 Petaluma growth management actions.
Wayne Schwartz 600 Garfield - comments re: safety of
existing houses, necessity for subsequent EIR.
The public hearing was closed..
A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner
Head to continue action on this item until such time as further information
regarding drainage, traffic and airport) is supplied by staff.
(Commissioner Head requested that the City Attorney look the EIR over to
determine its legality -)
AYES': 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 (Serpilioat
II. RAJA DEVELOPMENT CORP., CREEKVIEW COMMONS, MONROE STREET
AND ELY BOULEVARD, AP No. 149- 0'9 -02 AND 136 -11 -08 (portion)
('3.272B and 6.522A) .
Consideration of revisions .to approved' PUD and _Fin al Map..
The public hearing was opened'.
2'
Y'
:5
A motion was made by Commissioner Woolse and seconded b Commissioner
- - - Hilligoss -:Ao open •`;the • pubblic - - heari�n• -
- -. g and 'to. continue - `action on °-�thi"s' request
to the ,September ,24, 1985 - meeting per a -request by the developer.
AYES: 6 NOES : - 0 ABSENT: 1 (Serpilio)
III. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT: THE PRACTICE OF
°PALMISTRY AND :SIMILAR PROFESSIONS'.
.1. EIQ for the following,;
2. Consideration of proposed additions to provide definition of
"palmistry" and identify zoning district for permitted use.
'The public hearing was opened.
:SPEAKERS John Stevens Santa Rosa - applicant; explains details of
4ease - in commercial area.
:The . public hearing was closed.
A. motion was made4 by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissioner
'Hilligoss to. recommend issuance of a negative declaration based, on the
findings in the _staff report.
AYES: 6 NOES: 0 ABSENT.: 1 (Serpilio)
Findings For EIQ:
L 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
major periods of California .history or prehistory.
2. The .project does not have the potential to achieve short term to
-the disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
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 in human beings either directly or
indirectly.
A motion was .made by Commissioner Sobel and -seconded 'by Commissioner
Libarle 'to r,ecommend amendment to the. Zoning Ordinance . text in accordance
with the. recommendations and based on the findings in the staff report.
AYES 5 NOES: 1 (Head) ABSENT: 1 (Serpilio)
Text Amendment Amend the Zoning Ordinance text as follows:
3
�S`
r
4
f
To Add to Section 1 -203 the following definition for fortune- telling
and related activities:
R ' "Any person who practices, engages in or carries on, or
advertises by sign, circular, handbill or in any newspaper, or by
any other means, the business, profession, art or practice of
fortune- telling, divination, prophecy, finding or restoring lost or
stolen property, or mind or character reading, either . for or
without pay, in the City, by means or employment of astrology,
palmistry p hrenology, cartomanc
p y , p gy, y, clairvoyance, crystal gazing,
mediumship with departed spirits, augury, necromancy, seership
or other crafty 'science, cards, charms, potions, magnetism,
oriental mysteries or magic of any kind or nature."
2., Add Section 13.419 to allow fortunetelling and related activities as
described in Section 1.263 as a. conditional use within the C -H
(Highway Commercial) Zoning District.
Findi'ngs
1; The proposed amendment is in general conformity with the
Petaluma General .Plan and Environmental Design Plan and is not
in conflict with any policies or programs therein...
2;:. The. public: necessity, convenience and general welfare clearly
permit the adoption of the proposed amendments.
3' Fortune- telling, related activities: are most compatible in the
Highway Commercial Zone districts due- to location; purpose of
zone; nature of existing mixed -use businesses; proximity to
highways, freeways, and major arterials;. compatibility, with
General Plan/EDP policies; and availability of residential•
structures within commercially zoned` areas.
4. Fortune - telling. related. activities require a use permit due to the
uncertainty of how well such activities will merge within a given
neighborhood ;_ the untried nature of the business within the City
of Petaluma; the observed tendency of such activities in
communities near Petaluma to become visually ostentatious and not
in harmony with their- surroundings; and the compatibility of the
use permit procedure with the regulations of residential uses in
the Highway Commercial zone district.
PLANNING MATTER
IV. UPDATE ON HOME OCCUPATION STUDY REPORT.
This item was continued to an unspecified future meeting..
V. DISCUSSION` OF CITY FENCE REQUIREMENTS.
This item was continued to an unspecified future meeting.
4.
V1. =D:ISCUSSION ..: bF - ._GENERAL ,..- PLAN:. P =OLICY .: ON -:.-"FEATHERING_ n
DEVELOPMENT NEAR URBAN SEPARATOR.
After ,general discussion by the Commission, this item was continued to the
September 24 meeting to' allow time for Commissioners to prepare suggestions
for Commission discussion..
VII. SON.OMA COUNTY REFERRAL: DRAFT STUDY REPORT OF THE
SONOMA COUNTY PLANNING DEPAR_TMENT's DRAFT PETALUMA
DAIRY- STUDY (Cont.).
After ; general discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Head and
seconded by Commissioner Hilligoss to take the staff recommendations to the
City Council with the noted amendments.
AYES: 5 NOES: 0 ABSTAIN 1 (Libarle)
ABSENT: 1 ( Serpilio)
Recommendations
1. - The City of Petaluma supports the priorities established by the plan:
a. Preserve and enhance the agricultural resources found in the -_.
'Study area;
b. Preserve the area's scenic beauty;
c. Accommodate a variety of rural lifes.tyles
•d�. Insure that an adequate transportation network exists which will
accommodate proposed development.
2. Efforts by the County to establish the proposed Road Assessment
District for the properties between Highway 101 and the ,river along
the NWPRR south of the City should begin immediately.. More
'importantly, consideration should be given to expanding 'the assessment
.district and . its benefits to' include the • entire Petaluma Boulevard
South /M.cNear Avenue area within the existing City Sphere of
Influence.
3. The most restrictive agricultural zoning designations should be applied
to those areas of the ; plan served by the North Marin Water District
outside the "City Sphere of Influence as a means of strengthening' City
policy regarding availability of water for non - agricultural uses.
Furthermore, the City should consider specific outside water policy for
this area that will apply to commerical /industrial properties as well as
residential.
4. The City supports the establishment of an agricultural buffer zone
between urban -and rural uses. Creation of the zone should be based
on restrictive zoning,, recognition of topography and extremely limited
service availability.
5
� 0'J �5 ti
?
I
5. Lot sizes in the County lands adjacent to the southern City limits of
Petaluma .should remain frozen to prevent further- parcelization that
might affect eventual development to efficient urban standards and
services.
6. The City recommends support for the following land use
considerations:
a! The odd - shaped parcel at the southwest corner of Petaluma
Boulevard South and McNear Avenue should be changed from its
proposed designation of C -3, General Commercial to R -1,,
Single- Family Residential to provide more orderly and compatible
development of those properties...
i
b'. The San Antonio Creek area should not become a commercial node
that could increase pressure for development in the intervening
area between Petaluma and Novato. Separation of these
communities is an important principle that the Dairy Belt Plan
must help maintain.
c Parcels in the Kastania Road area should remain as shown in the-
proposed plan to prevent more urban intensity in a primarily
agricultural area.
di. Proposed County Commercial Zoning along„ Petaluma Boulevard:
South and the :Highway 101 on -ramps is imcompatible with the City
General Plan /EDP industrial designation and should be amended for
conform with the City. The City will be revising, its own General
Plan and some other designations may be applied, but until that
time the City should recommend conformance with its own plan..
7. The City and County should undertake a jointly funded specific plan.
study for the McNear Avenue /Petaluma Blvd. South /Highway 101 area
iii the 1986 -87 fiscal year.
8. The plan should give more consideration and study to the continued
economic viability of the dairy industry and identify interrelationships
between the dairy belt and Petaluma as well as the region.
9. T!he City of Petaluma strongly opposes the recommendation of the Dairy
ac o
County Planning Department proposal calling for Primary Agricultural
VIII. STUDY SESSION: RULES OF ORDER.
After discussion,_ a, motion' was made by Commissioner Woolsey and seconded
by Commissioner Sobel to amend. Section 501, of the Planning Commission.
Rules of Order per alternative No. 3 suggested in the staff' report to:
I
67
3. Amend the "unanimous" requirement to "a majority of members
present".
ADJOURNMENT 12:07 AM (9/11/`85).
ATTEST: 6),, w SAyl
arren Salmons
Planning Director