HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/18/1975I �• " ""�' ' p '; jP I( h{ .,'r': I I
it � "1111 I ,YI , q�; I, f
, I �`'�' I� i '' �:1� uasl 1y;$ �I �i s'� 4 1"
A G E N D A F a
�.
I"
.�yP d
•h,01 ' IiN -ti I k7.:1 an rp 1 "q:. e , F �" I R `II'i k Ilr Vr1r M
EI duI r.r'. (h' Y
Y� - �I ql 'Bal' * 1 ' Ilk ,• l a lnl� 1:. W I d� :III' a uf ran, 4 ��'� � T
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COP�2ISSION INOVEMBER 18;, 1975
REGULARpMEETING 3 T 7:30 P;M
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY, HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
u
�b h fi h I P L IC E':' TO T,HE I�
EDGE I ALLEG ANC c ,G
- --
ROLL, '•CALL':'- `' Comm: .Bondi =Head Hills -gos's Ho -rciza - <Pop '
0. ' h Wt,,l gh t • v I,I y " : ��� 1� t a a"
Waters
d 11 F v I 6 I - ,, uGi ., li , v ;Ilp �I- p aur I
STAFF::. ' 'Dennis B'o,ehlj';e, P.'lanning ` Direces s 4
I
�r n '
Itlpa� APPROVAL OFu.MINUTES u' � ._,u:'. I
fi•
I.
CORRESPONDENCE N
u •a ;;
�' � '
y E I..
n ronmental Im act onrra��
RAY NIZIBIAN� p „ ues�ti N
F
i n review re evaluation
, p (� F
G Q &SIT -E, nvi g for :a proposed' medical /
DESIGN REULEW h dental building to located fart 1120
ur il. •.ti r.r t t Iq
"i' i
1I I , V a u, • rr.'6 4 .�� ,.,, r
I,
LE
_.,,:Q , ,. .t,:i'dera`tion and
'. 1,. .
LAKEUIL GROWERS HATCHERY EI evaluation Use P ermi cons
. g
14f IEUALUAThON, MS PERMITr,;' � r p P ;, Y."
I `.,� � E� ;. � � � site design f +or la rlo osed hatcher Ito e �
I '
U13 7 & SITE DESIGN REVIEW �„� I ,' be" located •n� + r an;,P2 L' FD aV All North a"
McDowell Bled.
r rl,l, + p IV1Gl { L ,.. : w`' .I . 1 11�: 11, . L , d
I I r rnll pc , �
l 1 ,`'v
D ATION' OF CARN EGIMEI FREE Public ,Hearing to, l consieri,a requt 'initlated
ESIGNA �'
°LIBRARY AS. AN 'H;ISTORI,C " ,I by th"e` City of
p''" "Hi�stox G
&' ultura'1 "r
LANDMARK :. 'Pres,erva � . ti,ori Comnitte`e to - desiignate the ='
, � I I,,, ,,s 7 I,.'
w hu a I l I cornerla FOurthband � ," B ' Streets ase`anorfiheast
�:
nl �� w 1
m�
h16t0"r1C 1 &Tildmar,k
.ZONING, ;ORDINANCE NO 1072 N'.,t 8 Public': Hearing to consider ,a 'cha'nge Y lto the
+ }' IIY AMENDMENT. L Y u� p µr y I , Y . nl,il r Zoning Ordirianc`eF', Sec '' : 0 X300;, , „r
p 0 at10n 2 �ating.
P
71
m
II Ilt ' II, I I
" s r ', p- arkingl requirements.r �x "�
"PIIR "OP OS.ED RELO CAT�I:ON�irOF'� HILL „G `” „ublic ig �
CREST.', ,lu tl Continua'tiori I of P„ Heairi to consider
`� � . the' G° ,
( HOSPITAL Sr L`UATION:, �: d " ade ua'cyl of ' �.d
J �
CONTINUANCE Associates,,, •insofar 'as bmi r t,ted by. Elga,•r 'Hil'1 &, h ' ��',• ,
S IR EU j�the EIR su
-
i,ts completion in
compliance with !State; guide! - roes,, for` the
I, N,: h h v P 'i{rl y lp� a jl IIN ' . , .,,,p ro po se �.° H111Cr,eSt 'HOS ,1 -Ital g r tl
q X 11 p
re( December 16,
�'fllrt�l eCem
°j
e r c '
I. I : �ntinua •; , I
n + I r;l o nce -to D I
r a n
F � p
Y
I ry l t'I iU ,,� I I I I 11 I
r
d
' u�: r u .��;I•. ,,�a '� n _� .,.I G I , • r n „IT
J: r '
II. 1 • I l; ', &I hl � I;: II.: �. I o- I � ^ u i �l r . +. I } tir,
.. :rc � �� I + _ h "u '� ,,I •; I I �, � _'S 4 _d "�, 4 •V:,.� m 4 P :_ �..uFl 'i ..." i:. 'I. n ' '�Lrvl I� „' p Ighi:
.2s-
-'
IPj tal;,uma C < y Planning Commission Agenda, 'November 18;, 1975
;QANTAS' 'DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION -'" Cons I deraltiun '0'f - 'the Dra "Envi- ronmental Impac
FOR PROPERTY Re ort`submtted by 'Del Davis & Associates, Inc..,
p
NT- INUANCE Insofar as- Its .completion in complian with
COR ce
.
., y f' .
. Stacte guidelines, for "th'e` °P;lanne`d Community
j
, -• F �, D'istr -ic',t proposed - by Qantas 'Deve'Topment Corp
t , ,
for the M llineister property located' on North
McDowell Blvd'. - requ:est. con;tinuaa on_ until ..
:D'ecemb'er' 2;,; 19 7'51. ' =• -' ` _'. _
ADJOURNMENT:
. � .� � _.. r .,_.. _. .. .- r. ,, a ._.�.x .. _. .:.t.�• .. .�.;y. , _ .).:.•
, �
.7' _ lrr ,, r,t. e. ?, 7:, if ` :r'•" � ''• - .. 'o r+ �';',.�. i t, � t: ; +
".1.._ y Jt �'_.. .'��:. �t t y't. �; _ \5 {: t �i'�V��'1. ,�' .i'� ` -�ij '4.w ., i .. _ '•t
I
�r
r
. i '�> , i' } ;•''�t � 11 , : r ;t t_1., � , '�� t , G \1 z' ° ' 3 r
Z
'�
- ;t• µ .Y. \_ s J. �'' t 4. .a _: `. ., � j ( ^+ , _ 1 , ` '� 5. f ._ ;'£e ' t 1,. r :'2. f;
.
S
r
r
r,
v
�''�
:�
II
A' iY' e tl t 1 r f'y. 1 ` J.• � S, .7 t� 4/J .. ..
,
_
F
•
1
- 'i�
'1r-., .3 "• F • „L�a,.r r h • � , ,J °,, nl''����. i ` � - ,i�';. i, '� ..,.. ., `'.,. .,
I c A
,4
��ll
1 1 .. 1 -_ _ . rt .' • t ''. ,. 1 yt .. , "� z 1� ...��a . _ V,
ZA
.2s-
MINUTE'S
r
ALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 18, 1975
ULAR MEETING; 7•30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITX' HALL � I � 114 * I rY I h I t I I AETALUMA CALIFORNIA
PRESENT': Comm. Hor�ciza, Popp', Waters;, Wright`
ABSENT': Comm. Bond, Head,•Hilligoss
,
S TAFF , -: ,,,, Dennis Boehl) e, Planning, Di rector
X
minutes of November 4 1975 d as submitted.,
APPROVAL. OF MINUTES: The menu- , ,.were approve
m n
CORRESPONDENCE:` Mr. Boehlj ;referred.- to a letter from Shirley Furrer, which had
been di rected to the ,Planningi Commission,,.ob'j,ecting to the place-
men m oWrtg'he, P' ed that he lhadaattendede'l..nex't to a school.
ma Care & "G
s _ committee.meeting
eta u
Com �ht advi he
on ; No,veinber�;l l '4,�" 119'75,, " whi ch ha:d +b - e'en set "up at the request of the
Planning Commission. 'He advised that some additional security
measures discussed and agreed upon were:
1) " Th'e! a "tiori of locks one ^Iquite .•a few doors:
y g,, F
' 2') The Ct was ong to ask P.G „ &E:.. to look into the possi-
bility additional lights in the street area down Maria
Drive
The °.'center was going to look nto•the possibility of a
liurgTar: alarm *system or - security devices on the win-
d'ows'.
4) The center would make an attempt to keep patients.in
smal'1er groups iwh'en talon th” `
i g em for wal ks .
Comm Wright advised that the committee would be of an ongoing
nature.and'would,meet. again on 12, 1975.
RAY NUIBIAN E � °' r�efsly explaine'
IQ & Mr. Boeh1 e`'b " "
' °'" d � tYie'''proposal "for amedcal. /- dentist
SITE DESIGN REVIEW: office building to be constructed at 1122."B" Street and reviewed .
the staf of approval as & S mmended by
.i f an y recommended the, staff re ort The •,conditions r
" d- con "c'urred ( with , b °the Architectural t -e_ Design
Re�i l ew ,Gommi`t"t'ee were then read. ,;':Al brief d scussK on followed.
Comm' Waa'ers; moved to direct the.P1anning Director• to prepare and
f, y, po t'a n egat ve Declaration, for'the•o "' - The motion was
Li
seconded by ':C'omm:.''
AYES • 4 'NOES 0 ABSENT' 3'
Comm Wat ers 'moved to a rove the, site'' d with conditions as
ded b' PP _ Des n Review
the staff and, g
1 recommer The motion was seconded
y al & Site
Comm ttee. ,y Comm._Popp.
AYES OE
4 ,, '� �
G NS '0 ABSENT 3
:
®, h" a �� � .
gl, di ;i��
Petaluma City Planning Commission Minutes, November,18.:, 1975
LAKEVILLE GROWERS
..Mr,. Boeh1je- briefly explained' t-he proposal for a ..batchery to be •
HATCHERY - EIQ
as,tTucted at 13 North Mc He - Adyised. that the
qoT "Dowell Blvd. h
EVALUATION, US E
Atchi'tectural • Site Desigfti Review Committee had 'reviewed t=he
PERMIT U13-15 SITE
projeet and had, agreed with the,condit-ions as recommended 'by
_ I
DESIGN' I REVIEW:
of ,the ;
staff,, with the, except landscap ion Mr. B'6 ehlj e then
.
read the conditions of approval as.,Kecommended b Arch
y the
tural & Site Design Review Committee-
applicants,, .Mr. 'Charles Baum, one, Of the , stated he was f ami li ar
with all of the conditions "Of a 1.
,pp,rova
Wright ght moved to direct the Planning Director to, pr .8 an
Comm. i prepare a nd
post a Negative Declarat ft ..,-or-'. t,he project.. Comm•: Waters
seconded th6,moiion,.
Mr. Bdehlj:e clarified that a hatchery was a conditional use in an
M'L- District. The-Public H.eaxj.ng, regarding this usage was.
opened,; no comments were offered from the; ,audience and the Public
Hearing was, closed..
Comm. Popp iffoilved to grant the' Usei Permit subject to conditions! of
• the site, design. -The motibn'-was seconded' b Comm; Waters.
AYES 4, NOES ..-0 ..ABSENT 3.
- Comm. Popp moved to approve�'• the, site., with: conditions .as
p
reco Desgn Review C ommittee..
ommer.),d-6d y t he Architectural &. Sit i
, C
The motion was seconded -by Comm..
AYES 4 .NOES 0 ABSENT 3,
DESIGNATION O F Mr Bo6h,lj brief reviewed 'the ptaf f' report, and :cldr.ified that
CARNEGIE FREE LIBRARY if the library. were designated' as an historic landmark, it would
AS AN HISTORIC' in ef f'ect be an hiist6t - sin:Le'.it be a museum. to"
LANDMARK. house the :artifacts .related Zo, P.etaluma's ; heritage'.
j
comm. - w4ter"'s• questioned how the museum would be financed and
operated, - since it could., be c6st-ly'. 'Mr. Boeh1J:e replied that he
assumed.. it. would be up. t, ' 0 the �-
, Ci q1 ., ,'0ce it was still their
responsibility. He added. that he - wid.dld, check into the funding
qspect.,.of.:thej'museum. Comm. Popp! stated-'he felt, the City de-
se rved ab. hip triU' regardless ,of the expense factor.
er se�tjm 're
The Public Hearing was op I Fred Schram, Chairman of the;
Historic & Cultural Preservation; - Committee informed the Commis-
sion he felt the d I es of this historic. I-44tark would b'e_ a
• real irftle I s't'qne fbr th`& City. 6 Petaluma, and •although it might be
e i
an ad onal 'expense,` "th' 1 C e 'also 'felt the. City" de-
served lt..
Mr. Elmer 'Webb -stated that he,-. like to see th• historic
designation made, rather ,than have, the building destroyed., even •
if the library would not he'"used'.
-2-
1 ps
Petaluma Cat Planning
,,. Y
Commission M r, 97
n_ utes cNovemberl8 1 97 '
The P �ws,,clos,ed.
ubc:Hearng,a'
ipComm� Wri��FhtemLibr�ltolhrec- that the
dmlaredanhhstorcblanil
Carnegie ,1 re ary b landmark. The
'
motion,'was seconded by Comm. Waters,.
u irl" I, r
d � - AYES 4' i' ABSENT 3
,NOES 0
"
ZONING ORDINANCE
The staff report,rega the proposed Zoning Ordinance amend -
NO. 1072 N. C S. „1r.�
ment to �,ino'd -ify t]'e�l re'q'uirements,) for' covered parking spaces was
m AM�ENT:
ENDM
brief ' Mr "Boehlje recommended a change in the word-
n stated .staff report ,to; ensure that the parking
space replacing ,the, garage.,-could 'be, covered or uncovered. He
20 =N as follows.
en rea 11
t d the
I�
- t: .New construction
- "Dwelhng 'll S ngle famaly „cDuplextorSCompac,'
'of, dwel'hng units .shall include 'l . space which shall be in a
:, carport..or garage and. l space which "may be..uncovered and in the
driveway', li with as driveway widthl� of at lleast'.20 feet or a length-
1
' : l^
of,_ at .l°e'At r 40 ifeet, adequate to park at least 2 cars. Existing .
^, a
1.
cover' ed parlcyn'g facili -t may be conert'ed. for living facility
use, sub.j.ec to the requirement that if the covered parking space
is dwe lling un
�theeexis`tngd parking
spacektlat �is� and. conforms to Zoning Ordi-
g
,
I pave'd i ,.
nance, "an :i �ich,.�may•'b,e• uncovered,. .
The .Public Hearing' was opened. Mr-. Martin ,Gavriloff stated he
II•� 1�A�r
Would li ke, to fie�lo may arise, and asked 'fora
'
_ _'
- whethers then matter would "'have to go back - to
cl arific �a'tions to” ' a - ,
„I
d
the, City:'.Council',and then°, wait 30 days. after .their approval
before ,it became effective. Mr. Bo.ehlj'e replied that this
procedure was correct
I
The Public Hearing, was closed'.
Mr. Boehlje 'advised the, Commission that,,, in', order to „pass the
� ,
to the' Zoning' Ordinance,' 11 'members present, would have
he He mentioned that th'e item, could be .
dwl `in t , .
continued until the full Commission was present to take action on.
- this amendment:
,11r I, Comm1 w Wat'ers moved',' to 'continue) eons'ideration i ,of the proposed
.
Z onin g .Ordinance : amendment kuntil- , iithe next' ° °' - regular :meeting of the
, .„
Plann:n;g:.- Commission. The motibn,;was seconded by Comm. Wright.
AYES 4 -NOES 0 ABSENT 3
II
Ill hi r L .
.PROPOSED RELOCATION
Mr. Boeh'lje advised the Commission that the revised EIR for the
OF HIL
a n et been
p Hillcrest Hospital of as
c o
-
S °PITAL ui,i
fore su es ed that the
t
received„ from the Consultant, and.he'there su ggested
'
W LUATION"
„I, H f
Public''Hearn be :continued ,:until December 16 1975. e. urther
, .: . r m.,.g q ' -
"CONTINUANCE:
advised'the Commis Sion. that,, although'the bond issue for the
1
Petaluma City Planning-
Commission Minutes -' Nove_fib�er. 18`, 1°9'75
hospital on this site lad"be en 'defeated, he felt they should
comp-lete . their action on th . 'EIR since the ;EIR could ,provide
iznportai%t �informat:iory for other. similar sites and the Consultant
had `been paid' for ` a job that 'had: not as yet been _completed
_.
..
Comm. Popp, moved to continue the - P-ublie Hea.ring on the EIR for
the propos,ed`relocation , o'f Hillerest Hospital until December 1,6,
'The—motion was..-seconded .by_ Comm. Waters-_
AYES ' '•NOE& 0 .ABSENT` ` 3
QA DEVELOP
Q-
`' revised EIR.had been received - fr
Boehl advised tha the revs
CORPORA TION, �
p oratio p p d
the Consultant for the t Cor antas Develo menn ro ose
Q p'
FOR' MILLMEISTER'
--
PCD, bu.t. had been received too late for the ,staff to .respond.'
PROPERTY' CONT:INUANCE?:
Therefore;: he sugge`sted• 'the' EIR. certification. be, .acted •upon
at, the 'December. 2, 1975 meeting,. •''A' brief• .discussion followed
Mrs BoehlTe c1larifi.ed that' there had been no major discrepancies
"
in the' EIR, "but the Commission had felt they could not certify.
the' E a's being accurate' and'complet at the time of 'the Public
Hearing. e
Comm, Wright moved' t - ,cont_ nue con:sid'eration of:,:the EIR for the
'Development. Corporation P'CD �unt' "1 D`ec'ember .2 , 1975. The
motion was seconded 'liy:.Comm: 'Waters =.
1
AYES 4' NOES: . 0 ° ABSENT '
OTHER BUSINESS:'
"In response io •Comm.' °Waters ,query of the action. 'taken by the :City
-
Council regardin ' the. B`odega Avenue rezoni.ng /prezonirig., Mr
--
Boelilje stated that p.erliaps the, Commission - l& "sh 'to give 'the
staff some specific direction, s' nc& the City Council had not
indicated any further action, of' the-'staff or .Commission when they
had rejected . the rezoning /prezoning for the area as :recommended. '
by the °Planning Commission. e added that ;he+ .felt the Commission
should come `t?ack:.w_iAtli ( a revised plan ,of some sort for the :are,a.
Dis'cus's -ioi% ,followed as to what developments were 'actually pr.o-
posed f:or the area:: . Mr. Bo.ehlje staged that' he felt the Planning
Department would, be- seeing;parcel. maps, for_ this area short'.ly, and
t'h.ey 'wo:uld .trouble' processing them .becaus,e 'of' :no.. circulation,
patte'rri. ' He' also `advised that tthe zoning in this area Is no,t in.
conforma:'ty with t?he "General 'Plari; .which shows a maximum of two
"un -its per acre,
Comm: Popp -suggested designatting',..tl e area as a, Study District.
when it became evident , °that further- :consider-4-ion would. be
r "egured _
Mr. Martin 'Gavrilof,f °spoke - of the `need for 'new sewer lines 'to the
area - 'since -he felt further developments could, not occur with the
`- present; inadequate 'sewer sys'tem;.'
k
M ,
''City Pldfiiiing Qobti's inutes,l N r
ov be�` 8 , 197
Lii5ned"`l wha't the City took
es problem would ari e i
" s
Ij i� re thdt!"i :wQ id cau� e the people
"a, a u
n �$66h! 11 6d.
-P _ �.. ! , 1 1
i2 1-1 III _1�1 1.11 'A 1
ADJOU RNMENT:
There �l'bliI ; n, a dj further business, g journed at,, 8L:4.0
p.m.
4�,
Chairman
ttest:
problems because. 'L Ill would not . -, e- to sp t o e ve Up
their land unless�the land to be deve fronted on Bodega
Avenue `, He als6`advised that 'bie, should not approve .
private stree, tsA, i'i was felt that a circulation system was
needed': ,
The members of the C ommissi'p prpsentLdeter mined to hold off on
i .1 the o ega vehli'e. area at this time.
any further - action regardin g. , , , t
Comm . Wate�rs' suwsted, that a,.'ztudy s'ession be held by the Com-
mission gTi te the- action , 'EDP to de'tiermine 'whAt'l "the' 9mmission felt would. be
I I I -
' io'r ,, ' the, 4ppkop ia. 'd rie)�t five years, and to also consider
the , gr eenbelt .. chairman Horciza-statbd'he felt the staff.zhould
be prepared to consider the matter in January, 1976.