HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 08/06/1974A G E N D A
PE.TALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
-ITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
PLEUGE.ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL: Comm. Balshaw Be.11ovich
Popp Waters Bond
STAFF: Dennis Boehlj Senior Planner
AUGUST 5,
7:30 P.M.
PETALUMA,
Hil;ligo'ss
1974
CALIFORNIA:
Mattei
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
CORRESPONDENCE
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Site Design Reviews:
1) Sousa - Pacheco Development Co. - Temporary
L office in exist ng esidentlal structure
located at 835 East' Kdsh
Mobile and modular
On Lakev ille Highway
SONOMA COUNTY REFERRAL: Anneliese Riedel - Request for a variance permit
to allow a lot split to provide for an additional
single-family dwelling at 3170 Skillman Lane in
an Unclassified- B5 -1�5 acre District.
WALTER KIECKHEFER - Variance requests for the Golden Eagle Shopping
VARIANCE V6-74: Center located at 2_ East Washington St. to albs:°
a 'reduction in building setback; to allow an increase
in allowable he ight from bottom to top of the sign
face; and to allow an increase in maximum allowable
sign area.
KVALHEIM MACHINERY -
USE. PERMIT 'U7 ;74
SITE DESIGN REVIEW:-
HILLCREST HOSPITAL
USE PERMIT U8 -
S ITE DESIGN REVIEW:
2) Site .design review for two small offices
proposed at the rear of the building.
1) Public Hearing to remove the non - conforming
status of an existing machine shop at 825
Petaluma Blvd, South and permit expansion.
2) Site design review for proposed storage and
administrative bui.l:dingsT
1) Public Hearing to remove the non - conforming
status of an existing hospital located at
450 Hayes Lane to allow temporary expansion.
Petaluma City .Planning Commission Agenda
August 6 1974,
Page 2
W s H I,,. SUPPLY
RE'Z'ONING Z7 - 74:
W . H :,I SUPPLY
USE PERMIT U,1 0-74
SITE' DESIGN: REVIEW e
Public Hearing to consider request from
M -L to C- H'f,or property located a.t 709 Petaluma
Blvd. South.
1) Public.Hear ng to consider a Use Permit to
allow a warehouse and.wholesale display of
hand and small power tools at 709 Petaluma
Blvd. South.
2) Site design review for proposed warehouse
and wholesale display area,
AMENDM +ENT.. T BD IVISION
Co
an amendment to Subdivision
ORDIN
Ordinance No..
1046
N.C.S., Section 22.7 ®1301..3
,C.S.
regarding in
lieu
park dedication fees.
AMENDMENT TO
Public Hearing to
consider the' Noise Section of o
GENERAL PLAN:
the Ecologic
Resources
Element of`the General
'Plan for the
City
of Petaluma.
ADJOURNMENT
W
M -1NUTE S
PETALUMA ;CITY PLANNING:.`COMMISSION AUGUST 6, 1974
REGU MEETING' " 7t P.M.
CITY'COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
PRESENT Commo:Balshaw, Bellovi.ch, Bond, Mattei Waters
ABSENT �;_ Comm. Hil Popp
STAFF Dennis.Boeh1j,e, Senior Rlanner
APPROVAL OF MINUTES- The minutes of July 16, ,19`74 were approved as submitte&
CORRESPONDENCES A letter from.the law firm,of LsFranchi,.Bettinelli &
Mickelstn, who ,represent Condiotti Enterprises, Inc.,
was read requesting a two -year extension of time in
which to prepare a Final Map in accordance with the
Tentative, Map for Westridge Units 1 and 2. Mr. Max
Mickelsen addressed the Commission, stating that since
the project. had been. held.up by litigation and the
judgment did not become final until. a few weeks ago,
it was felt that the 18 -month period for filing a Final
Map should not begin until the date of'this final
' judgment.. He added that either an 18®month period
extension :or a two -year extension-of time in which
to file the Final Map wou -ld`be suitable.
Discussion followed regarding the propriety of the
extension and the"length of the extension to be granted.
Comm Waters then made -the. motion to approve a time
exteins'ion; :of 18 ,months for the filing of Final Maps
for Westridge,Units..I and. °2 o The motion was seconded
by Comm. Balshaw,
AYES 5: NOES- 0 ABSENT' 2
Chairman.Bond•read.a letter from the Director of Commu-
nity Development to „Young. America Homes regarding the'
fence adjacent to the Casa Grande, Jr/ Sr High which was
constructed,in conjunction with Sun_nyhi:lls Subdivisono.
This letter stated that the arrangement proposed by Mr.
Meyer, Superinten Schools, to present the gates
to the - school district to be installed by them at a. - ,
later date after the field was developed would; be
acceptable.
NSENT CALENDAR° Comm:° Balshaw requested that the site design review for
the Sousa- Pacheco. D.evelo:pment Company be removed from
the Consent Calendar and considered later on the Agenda
to allow further discussion.
, T-7
Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes, August 6, 1974 "''K..
Page 2
The site design review for American Leisure Living,
180.0'Lakeville Highway -ad been withdrawn from the
Agenda.
SOUSA- PACHECO Temporar y office in residential structure
. .,
DEVELOPMENT CO. located at '929 - East Wash�ixigton Street
SITE DESIGN
REVIEW: Comm, Balshaw questioned the height of the sign,
stating that since East Washington,was an entranceway
to the city, an effort should be made for aesthetic
signing along that street. Dick L eb.a rep.resenting the
a'pplicant., replied that the sign was unobtrusive and of
- a low 'key nature, and he therefor felt it to. be
aesthetically appropriate. The location of the sign
on the site was discussed.
Mr, Ernest Curtis.,, a ,neighbor adjacent to the property,
questioned what the-use of the house would be. Chairman
Bond - explained the proposed usage, and' °.the sign location.
Comm..Balshaw made a motion to approve the site design
with conditions as r ecommended by the Site Design
Review Committee. The motion was.s'econded by Comm. Waters.
AYES 5 NOES. 0 ,ABSENT 2
SONOMA COUNTY Anne1-ies'e. Riedel Request,. for a variance, permit to
REFERRAL: a ow a of s`p "Et;.to provide for an additional single -
family dwelling at 31.70 Skillman 'Lane .in an U
B °5 -1o5 acre District;
The request for a variance. wa s-.. briefly reviewed and
the Commission informed that the. staff opposed the granting
of this variance because it would encourage urban -
ization. lands which City plans designate as agricul-
tural open space.
Comm, Balsha_w. made a :motion to requels.t, the staff to
forward. a letter opposing the ,requested, variance to the
Sonoma County Board. of Zoning Adj'ustmonts -, since its
approval would constitute; further urbanization. of this
Tural.areao Comm. Bellovich seconded ^the motion,
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2
WALTER KIECKHEFER Variance requests for -'the 'Golden Eagle, Shop;ping Center
VARIANCE' -74 & 'located at. :2 East Washington St, to allow reduction
V7 -74; in ; building setbacks to allow an increase';in allowable
height bottom to -top :of the sign .face and to
- rease in maximum allowable sign area°
The st briefly rev ewed`the. three variance requests
and
, on was informed that although it was
felt Justification existed .for the reduction in building
setback, there did not appear to be justification:
for the increase in allowable sign "height or in maximum
allowable sign'areao
Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes, Augus -t 6, 1974
Page 3
Mr. Walter'Kieckhefer explained the design of the sign
and questioned why the City disapproved. Mr. Boetlje
explained that according to the zoning ordinance the
allowable height from the bottom.to top of the sign
face, should "be 10 feet and that the City had also
been discoufaging.reader -board type signs. Mr. Kieekhefer
explained how the reader -board would be utilized and
maintained He also cited examples of items that had
been displayed on a reader board designed and main-
tamed by him at a .Novatq shopping ,center. o Mr.
Kieckhefer informed the Commis that the tenants
in the rear of the shopping center could not be easily
seen from the street,, and the reader -board therefore
would be Very helpful for them,
Chairman Bond questioned why'the. staff was in opposition
to the sign Mr. Boehlj;e replied that the sign was
considered too l and r.eaders,boards were often not
maintained properly. ,Also, the staff preferred just
an identification- sign.for the shopping center, not
something that would be�c'hanging constantly and pro-
distraction.
viding
® It was clarified that the variance regarding the
building setback was a requirement of site design
review if the free- standing sign was to be constructed.
Comm Bellovich made a motion"to grant the variance
request to allow a reduction in buildng.setback from
the street .from 30 feet to approximately 14 feet,
The motion was seconded by Comm. Matter,
AYES. 5 NOES 0', ABSENT 2.
Comm Bellovith'made a, motion to grant the variance
requests to allow an increase in'al height from
'bottom to 'tope of the sign face from, l.0 feet to 14 feet
6 inches and to allow an increase in maximum allowable
sign area from 200 square .feet .to approximately 213
square feet. .'Corm..Mattei seconded the motion.
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2
KVALHEIM.MACHINERY The Commission was informed that the Use Permit was
USE':PERMI.T U7. -74 necessary to remove the n0n7conformieng status of an
& existing machine shop at 825 Petaluma Blvd. South to
SITE DESIGN REVIEW- permit expansion. A`brief review of the proposal to
add two sma =ll offices at the rear of the building was
presented, and the recommended . condi -tions of approval
were read.
The Public Hearing was opened and Mr. Irwin Kvalheim
addressed the Commi;ssiono He stated that he felt the
Petaluma P'lannin'g Commission Minutes, August 6, 1974
Page 4 •
View from the river :would be improved by the project
as the land'scaping.of'ice plants and pine trees would
:eventually shield 'the back of the shop, `No other
comments were offered and the Public Hearing was closed.
Comm.. Mattei'-made a motion to grant, the Use Permit
for Kvalheiin Machinery subject to `cond'tions of site
design review. The motion was seconded by Comm..
Waters.
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2
Discussion followed regarding the requirement for
paving the off-street employee parking spaces,. Mr.
Kyalheim stated that,, although he did intend to pave
this : area, it was not economically feasible at this
time.. In view of the fact that the applicant has
been continually upgrading the subject 'site, it was
determined that the paving.requirement should stand,
but that the applicant should not be required to
comply immediately
Comm. Mattei made a motion to approve the site design
subject to the four conditions of approval as stated.
Comm. Waters seconded the motion.
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2
HILLCREST'HOSP'ITAL The staff explained that a Use Permit for the Hill -
USE 'PERMIT U8 -74 crest Hospital had not been granted in the 'pas°t and was
& now necessary to remove the non.- conforriming status and
SITE - DESIGN REVIEW;.- allow temporary expansion The project, was briefly
reviewed and the ,recommended' conditions' of ag,p.roval
of the Site Design Review Committee were read,.
The Public Hearing was - opened.and the Ho:spital.Admin-
istrator, Mr-., Charles Cowen addressed the Commission,
He informed them that space at Hillcrest, is very
critical,, but they did not, want to go into permanent
construction on the site: until a determination had
been made on the future :of the hospital.. Mr o . Cowen
therefore requested that 'the additional parking spaces
not'be required at this time, or if they did have
to comply with this requirement, that it be on a
temporary' basis Only. Cherie -rman Bond asked 'what
temporary construc'ti'on would consist of. Mr. Erskine,
the architect for the project, replied, that they
would agree to :surface the area with gravel and provide
bumpers, but did not.wish to do excavating, grading
and permanent.b.lacktopping and curbing. He added that
the required.gatking spaces had been met and he did
Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes, August 6, 1974
PARe. 5
not see the need to require more. The requirements
were read from the.zoning ordinance and it was clarified
that adequate Fparking already being provided for
the :hospital. Mr. Cowen mentioned'the necessity of
pro'vidi'ing guards° for the extra parking site and also
of providing proper drainage for the area.
Mt.
ation P
t.g Cueta1umepre.senting the -Irate Taxpayers
Petaluma. Chapter,' informed the Commission
that they were bitterly opposed to °the relocation of
Hillarest Hospital since felt the existing
building was well built and could accommodate expansion
on the site. Mr. Curtis was in favor of the construction
of temporary buildings.at this,, time until a determination
was,made on the future of the hospital.
Comm,. Balshaw felt* that any future permanent construction
at Hllcrest or its'relo.caton should require removal of
all temporary facilities and-incorporation into the
general - architectural scheme. Mr. Cowen replied that
that requirement would,b.e perfectly acceptable to him.
He added that their goal to either expand or move
to another site, and'new permanent buildings on the site
would incorp.or.ate the existing temporary facilities into
the overall des:i,gn. Mr. Boehl,je informed the Commission
that the :aforementioned condition should be added to the
Use Permit.
The, Public Hearing was closed.
Comm.`Balshaw made a motion to grant the Use Permit
subject to conditions of site design review, and also
to add' a. condition. to, the U`s;e. Permit that, if the hospital;.
is either expanded or relocated to another site, all
temporary structures on the site will be. = removed. Comm
Mattei seconded the ,motion;.
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2 `
Comm.. Waters. made, a motion. to approve the site: design
review With conditions of approval -as recommended by
the Site Design Review Committee. Comm. Bal:shaw seconded
the motion.
9YES 5 NOES', Q ABSENT' 2
A recess,was'called at 9.12 p.m. and the meeting resumed.
at 9018 p.m.
Mr. Cowen' informed the CoinmL,asion he did not understand
why, additional parking spaces had "to be provided when
the requirements of the Zoning,Ordinance had been met.
Mr. Boehlje explained that 'the Zoning Ordinance only
Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes, August 6, 1974
Page 6
specifies minimum m bequirements and the. Commission ion may
impose. additional 'requirements if they deem it necessary,
He Added that the applicant, would. have the right to
-appeal to the City*Coundil.
Mr.. Boehlje then. asked. the Commission for a clarifi-
'cation of the. type of. ;surface required for the parking
area. After a dis.,cu ' stion it ' was ',- determined that a
surface consisting of oil - tre gravel provide a
mudand dust-free 'surface would be acceptable. Mr.
.Cowen,sta he.would, be agreeable to those requirements.
W.,H..I. SUPPLY The staff briefly reviewed. the rezoning , request for
REZONING Z7-74 property located at 709 Petaluma Blvd. South and the
intended -use of the site The'Comi:ffission was informed,
that lot ;split would uld be required in .connection with
the project and the total parcel would, then be 14,500
square; feet,,;.
The Public Hearing, was opened and Mir. Don Petro, repre-
senting the builders of the project, explained that
.rezoning ng to C-H was requested be cause the . s i , te
did.,hot meet the ;minimum lot size required for an
M D!..str r, ,comments"" ict. No ot her were, off ered, and
the Public Hearing was clo
Comm. Balshaw made andtiori to recommend approval of
t,h_e-M-L_rqzPping to the City Council an Comm.
,Bellov3 seconded th M e motion
AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2
W.H.I, SUPPLY The proposal to allow a warehouse and wholesale
USE-,PERMIT U10-74 display of hand and small power tools at 709 Petaluma
& 'Blvd.. South was briefly rev and the staff
SITE DESIGN REVIEW:; recommended approval of the Use Permit, zubject to the
Gouncil"s approval of't 'rezoning And site design review.
The -_Publie Hearing was.., opened and Mr. 'Don Petro
addressed the Cbmmis.s1pti j:'egarding the, required
six foot high solid screen fend-in -�a along _I , _g the
northerly property line. It was clarified that
if the existing. fence and hedge ,. cbtistituted a
continuous screen six foot high, it would fLlfill the
requirements of Coadition'#7 of the site design
review and ,not have to be replaced.
No other comments were o the Public Hearing
was closed'.
Petaluma PlAnn Ilng 'C'omis io'n Minutes, Au . gust 6, 1974
Page 7
U
Comm. Bellovich made,a motion to grant the Use
Permit subject to conditions of approval of the site
deskgft� i
v, Vq review -and ' "t-he�i, of the City
Comm Bx -aw sd6ond6d the motion.
J
Council = =.:: :4 - ' Is h W
S
AYES 5 NOES 0. ABSENT 2
9 (,that ICandition #3 of the
site . design ,review be� changed.. It
o . "All trees and
shrubs shall be at least 5-g "
allon size,
W ol ty
do nun o `Balshaw. made t-
',mo-i.on the site
design review with conditions. ;qf; approval as stated
and amended. Comm, Bellovith.secofided the motion.
o I
- NOES i.,: ci,� 2'
YE8 5
0
U Orfl El , k', bCU 0
1 -d
DM' earing. o consm the.
AMEN ENTXtd`.il �T' 0 Public `H t ,No
- i se Section of the
GENERAL PLAN — Ecologic Resources' `EtlemeHf' aD the 'General Plan for •
the of Petaluma-,
8 J Bal�shaw re
oi_.-VAi' r
cra-f-t Noise" on page
prop t -and stated he did
• not feel that the dir'poxt have to
conform to houses that may later be built, but rather
no; ho ug & "be -' d1l'b" ed too be O'nstructed within
w
airport. He also dB(A), noise contour of the
th. aircraft .-i-aft —c"
.
the 70 sug,geste a time schedule In which e rc co
mf '.I
';`Dper.a:tional
1V
., -Mil., . -3tihe on. of the Noise
_thatl.� was being;" ,r6fert6d: •o. •a "model"
di 'be th "as an example of
- sei- Inan
b,-.4 � b be adopted. He
I', 4 added that a',specif i�c, ribxi sex �, e could later be
adopted. f or City
Comm Ba 'desirable to"plac
lsha'w did not feel it. w e
- v
&t
.:esidential ",rea'r ( a . dJy,ac._n-t to' a four lane
thoroughkare as suggested co6, " 4' e .10.:, since that would
4 p_9
be using the rear yard as a buffer and as open
space. -Discu&s followed regarding noise levels in
ixes,identi--a areas and whether - dB(A) would be
_ for `thes areas,. Members of the Commission felt
li-hair'-ii desirable to be more specific at this time,
.Mr. Boehlj°e explained to the Commission that at this
time we were only meeting the.requirements-of the
State law and setting • forth, -and policies. He
- added that . the standaids on page 1 7 were only
general guidelines and that specific standards would
intothenoise ordinance.. Mr. Boehlje
be - incorporated
then referred to the last sentence in Section 5.05Al
which states, "Any noise ordinance should adjust or
refine these standard I s !according to, 'the time or - type
of noise. ",� which he felt would relieve the necessity
of being more specific at this time.
`The Public Hearing was opened No--comment's were.
,: o ff er e d -'Publizwas
,,o fe , red :from the audience and the
,closed.
Comm. Waters moved that the Noise S ection b 6 'adop t e d
in principle only,. The motion died for lack' a -
se
.Discussion followed regarding the noise level standatds,
for residential areas, listed in Section 5.05.`01 on the
- top. of. -page 7,. `It'was determined to add the word, ''desired
before: "maximum Averaged level standakdsl should
be established" and change "60 dB.(A)"' for residential
,areas to "65 dB(A)...
Comm. Bilshao made a motion to recommend, to the 'Council
t s initi
the adop of ...e; Noise Secti.on'..as th e . City, a
-�', 1 _ iti
effort, in'establi.gbing noise standards. Comm.. %Mataei
seconded' ,-the motion.
AYES 5 NOES 0. ABSENT 2
OTHER BUSINESS: Comm. 'Bb:lshaw informed the; Commission Of A 'HUD pro'gram.
;of 'housing for the elderly.. Disdiis.si6n f6110"Oed and it
was dot ermine after more information was obtained it.
would be submitted to the,Gity Manager 'for determination
of a, line of act-ion,.' , Mr. Boehl-JI -also informed the C6m.-
mission that housing for, the elderly would 'be-indluded
in, the annual update of '!the. Housing Element .which was
presently being'cPWiled,.
ADJOURNMENT',- There 'being` no further business, the meeting Adjourned
at 10:40 p.t
Chairman
,Attest:�,
•
- - IV.