HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/10/198539'2
--
Not 'Official °Until ved
-By 'The Planning Commission
:MINUTES
of (Minutes are �" Action Minutes" and represent .a summary
full taped transcripts of Planning Commission hearings.)
Petaluma Planning Commission December 10, 1985
'.Regular Meeting 7 :30 p.m.
City Council Chambers Petaluma, California
PRESENT: Commissioners Head, - Hilligoss, Libarle, Read, Serpilio,
Sobel, Woolsey
_AB SENT: None
'STAFF: Warren Salmons, Planning Director
Pamela Tuft, Principal Planner
'Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the November 26, 1985 meeting
were approved as printed.
CORRESPONDENCE None.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Salmons reported that McNear Hill project
will not be on the agenda as reported in the newspapers.
, COM'MISSION-ERS' REPORT Commissioner's Hilligoss and Read reported
that they and four staff members attended a Planning Seminar at Sonoma
State University on December 7.
NOTE: Strike -Out Type ( - - - -) = Deletion
-Underline Type ( ) = Addition
PUBLIC HEARINGS
L. PARK PLACE VI, PHASES 2 AND 3, QANTAS DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, NORTHWEST CORNER OF RUSHMORE AVENUE AND
PROFESSIONAL DRIVE, AP No's 136- 111 -33 and 36 (3.243B) .
1. Consideration of EIQ .
2. Consideration of revision to PUD development plan to replace 16
one - bedroom units with 8 two- bedroom units.
The public hearing was opened.
1
f'
j
l
I
SPEAKERS: Jon Joslyn - Representative of Qantas Development -
answered questions regarding cost of units.
The I'blic hearing was closed.
P, g
A motion was made by Commissioner Serpilio and seconded by Commissioner
Sobel to recommend issuance of a negative declaration for the modification of
units as described in the staff report subject to the findings in the staff
report
M AYES: i 7 NOES: 0 ABSENT U
co
Iq Findings
(, 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 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
V 'sadvantage of long term environmental goals.
3. The project 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 in human beings
either directly or indirectly..
is
5 The project is subject to site plan and architectural review pursuant to
Petaluma. Zoning Ordinance section 26 -41 et- a1...
A motion was made by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissioner
Hilligoss to recommend approval to the City Council- of the proposal to
remove 16 one - bedroom units from Park Place VI, Phases 2 and 3 and install
8 additional two - bedroom units, subject to the findings and conditions in
the staff report.
l
AYES: I 6 NOES: 1 (Head) ABSENT_: 0"
I,
Findings
i
A. The modified PUD development plan will not significantly increase
traffic or have, a negative effect on roadways.
RIN
B. The plan for the proposed development presents a unified an organized
arrangement of buildings. and service facilities which are appropriate in
' .relation to adjacent or nearby properties and that adequate- landscaping,
--
-- -- -
and /or screening is included to insure compatibility_.,
I
2
394
C. The natural and scenic qualities of the site are protected, as
- - -- -- —_ - conditioned., .. - :adequate available . public -and - . private - -- spaces
desigriated- on 'the 'Unif - Development
D . That the development of the subject property, as conditioned, will not
be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of
the City and will be in keeping with-the general intent, and spirit of
-the zoning regulation of the City of Petaluma, with the Petaluma
, General Plan, and with any applicable Environmental Design Plans
adopted by the City.
E. The modified plan, as conditioned, will result in a more desirable use
of land and better physical environment than would be possible under
any single zoning district or combination of districts by reducing
vacancies.
Conditions::
1. The' reduction in. unit numbers shall not have any impact, reduction or
recalculation on the amount of land previously dedicated to the City
(e. g. parks, school sites, etc..) , fees, exactions., and other
dedications previously required based on ultimate number of units
constructed.
2. A revised development plan and landscape plan showing the approved
changes shall be ;provided to the City in sepia original form within
thirty days of site plan approval of these modifications.
3.. All modifications approved herein are subject to site plan and
:architectural review pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 26 -401 ( Site.
Plan and Architectural Approval) .
4. All previously approved conditions of the Park Place VI' PUD shall
remain in full effect.
II. WE'STRIDGE IV AND V, .DEBRA HOMES INCORPORATED, SOUTHWEST
OF "I" STREET AND WESTRIDGE DRIVE., AP No's 19- 401 -02 and
19- 240 =04, (3.307A, 6.610, 11.244A).
1.
Consideration
of
draft subsequent environmental impact report.
2.
Consideration
of
re-prezoning to PUD .
3.
Consideration
of
pre - tentative map: 156 single - family lots.
This item was removed from the agenda on the request of the developer,
Debra Homes and the principal property owner, Mr. Lavio. Rescheduling
will occur and all property owners and interested persons, will be. renotified.
III. BEST STORE AND DELI, JOHN D. MILLIKEN , 800 PETALUMA
BOULEVARD NORTH,- AP No's 0.06 - 051 -23 and 24, (1.484) .
1. Consideration of E.I.Q.
2. Consideration of a use permit to allow a convenience market.
3
395
NOTE i
I SO
An updated traffic report was handed out prior to this agenda
item.
The pi blic hearing was opened.
SPEAKERS: John Milliken - applicant - objects to facade changes, paving -
r on Lakeville.
Phyllis Powell 20 West Street - objects to traffic, bus stop
I in vicinity.
The public hearing was closed.
A motion was made by Commissioner Libarle and seconded by Commissioner
Head to direct staff to prepare a negative declaration based on the findings
in they staff report.
AYES': 7 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0
a. Due to the developed nature of the existing site, 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.
b. The project, as conditionally approved,, does not have the potential to
aichieve short -term, to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental-
goals.
C. Because the proposal does not include additional. phased development,
the project 'as conditionally approved does not have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
I.
d. The project, as conditionally approved, does not have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings
either directly or indirectly.
L .
e. The project site mitigates possible adverse effects of the previously
approved site at 715 Petaluma Boulevard North by moving the
convenience market further from residential areas.
I'
A motion was made by Commissioner Sobel and seconded by Commissioner
Woolsey to grant the use permit subject to the amended findings and
conditions in the staff report.
AYES:!, 6 NOES:. 1 (_Hilli oss)... ABSENT.: 0-
4 >,
39 6
Findings
1.
The` proposed- structure 'and use, subject`to the'.conditions ` of approval;
conforms to the intent and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the
General Plan, and EDP.
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. This project site and landscaping is subject to SPARC review and
approval. SPARC shall consider requiring the-- -rete*_ - i on-- -and
rehabilitation of --t}re - istixrg -- front - scare. to maintain or create
turn -of- century architecture in keeping with downtown character
2. ."No additions to the front building are allowed per Zoning Ordinance
Section 25 -401.
3. -Prior to occupancy of the new convenience market, Petaluma - levard
shad- �es4z�ipe�rrrcl�t }•terronrsc- iarprever�--ta-
th
teirn - -- lane- --to -- tires-- sat7afaetierr- f-- Lire -- amity - engineer: -- Prior--to
first -ai a iorr-,- .- a- �tripirrg - g}an- -fot - -t re- Yrevr- bane-- pre z4fie
engineer -or- eer- sia�li -he- sezb�nittecr-tYr;- PPronet-lrp;: -eke
Eiitp �irgrteer - - -0 Cher- recturem�e =rEs�rei- recomnieadatorrs -ef- the - traffic
con- s-nitantt --aTrd-- itr- -£�rghtecr-- (presenteei --at-- the-- hearhMr - -shall --be
f-alfiHe&. the mitigation measures recommended by the traffic study
shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer';
DKS Traffic Report dated 2 December, 1985:
A. We recommend that the northerly edge of the southerly driveway
.continue parallel with the existing building. This will provide a
better alignment' with Cherry Street and facilitate right turns
from the driveway.
B. The corner of the existing building does restrict clear signt
distance to the wouth for drivers exiting the driveway.
However, drivers can see well once the car enters the sidewalk
area. While this condition is tolerable, remodeling of the
northwest building corner could improve the situation.
C. Consideration could be given to providing additional advanced
pedestrian crossing signing and marking. The nearby traffic
signals on Petaluma Boulevard North would offer convenient
alternative crossing locations for some pedestrians.
D. Restripe Petaluma Boulevard North to serve four lanes of traffic
plus a central left turn lane to facilitate turning movements into
various driveways along this portion of Petaluma Boulevard North.
This sould also include a pavement treatment in the project area
such as exists along Petaluma Boulevard North . in the vicinity of
A
397
r
Lakeville Road where the gutter area is paved to facilitate its use
as part of a travel lane. This; would also minimize the "bump"
between the driveway and the street.
K. Design the remodeling of the pedestrian access points to the min =-
i market to improve sight distance between westbound drivers and
pedestrians exiting the building and entering the parking lot.
L.. Indicate where the trash pick -up area will be.
4. This use permit may be recalled to the Planning Commission for review
at. any time due to complaints regarding traffic congestion, noise
generation, or other potentially obnoxins negative operating
characteristics. At such time, the Commission may repeal the use
permit or add /modify conditions of approval."
5. There shall be no open storage of equipment, materials, trash, litter,
or packaging.
6. All trash bins and /or garbage cans shall be fully contained and
screened.
7. There shall be no inside or outside seating for the consumption of food"
on the premises.
8. The future building site shall be landscaped (weed suppressing ground-
cover is acceptable) -.
6
E.
Relocate the existing crosswalk .delineation across the south leg of
Petaluma Boulevard North at Cherry Street to provide proper
clearance to the new driveway.
F.
Design the landscaped area at the southwesterly corner of the
property to have plant materials which will maintain good,
M
li
maintenance free sight distance to the south.
G.
Repave the broken sidewalk along the project frontage.
U
CO
H.
Design business signing to avoid restricting driveway sight:
distance. Thee southerly driveway will be the principal access
point although some drivers will use the northerly driveway.
I!
Widen the flares at the northerly driveway to be at least three-
feet rather than one foot, as exists, to facilitate turning.,
movements.
J .
Retain the planter concept or other architectural feature to
i
maintain pedestrian flow along the regular sidewalk area rather
than fully open up walking space along. the westerly face of the
j
building. The intent would be to maximize sight distance
relationships,. between pedestrians .near the corners of the building
];
and exiting drivers.
K. Design the remodeling of the pedestrian access points to the min =-
i market to improve sight distance between westbound drivers and
pedestrians exiting the building and entering the parking lot.
L.. Indicate where the trash pick -up area will be.
4. This use permit may be recalled to the Planning Commission for review
at. any time due to complaints regarding traffic congestion, noise
generation, or other potentially obnoxins negative operating
characteristics. At such time, the Commission may repeal the use
permit or add /modify conditions of approval."
5. There shall be no open storage of equipment, materials, trash, litter,
or packaging.
6. All trash bins and /or garbage cans shall be fully contained and
screened.
7. There shall be no inside or outside seating for the consumption of food"
on the premises.
8. The future building site shall be landscaped (weed suppressing ground-
cover is acceptable) -.
6
a
9. Exterior lighting and "No Loitering" signs shall be posted to the
satisfaction. of . the Police : ,Department -and .subject _to ..design - review -by
10. The two parcels shall be combined prior to the issuance of building
permits. A building survey may proceed prior to parcel merger
11. Verification of an access easement on the next property to the north
shall be provided to the Director of Community Development prior to
:the issuance of building permits.
12. All improvements shall comply with the Sonoma Water Agency Design
Guidelines.
13. The Use Permit previously. approved for 71.5 Petaluma Boulevard North
sha 1 become null and void upon approval of this Use Permit.
1 Deliveries are to be made on -site only, not :from the street
PLANNING MATTER
IV. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
CALENDAR.
The following calendar was adopted by the Commission:
PLANNING COMMISSION
1986 CALENDAR
(ALL MEETINGS ARE AT 7:30 PM, THE SECOND AND
FOURTH TUESDAY OF THE MONTH)
.January 14 July 8
28 22
February 11 August 12
25 26
S
March 11 September 9
25 23
April 8 October 14
22 28
May 13 November 11
27 25
7
I
399
June 10 December 9
24
ADJOURNMENT 8:51 PM.
ATTEST:
Warren Salmons,, Planning Director
CO
I
-
I