Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/20/1973A G7 E N D A lE'TALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 20, 1973 .ECULAR MEETING 7 :3.0 P.M. CITY COUNCIL. CHAMBERS, CITY HALL - PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL -CALL: Comm. Balshaw Popp Hood Mattei I illigoss _7aters - - Bond - STAFF: :Frank P. Grad Acting Director of Community Develobment APPROVAL OF MINUTES CORRESPONDENCE GARY STOKES`& RUDOLPH YOUNG - REZONING Z26 -73: Public Hearing to consider the application of Gary Stokes and Rudolph Young to rezone approxi- mately 2.89 acres located on the southeast side of Casa Grande Road southwest of the'southeasterly projection of South McDowell Blvd from "A" to C -N Dist I(?DIFICATIONS TO Public Hearing to consider the following modifz- THE MASTER,PLP_N OF cations to the Master Plan of Zoning�to make it ZONING;: consistent with the Genera. Plan and;the Environ- mental Design Plans: 1 Proposed rezon.i,ng from M: - to M;L for A - P. 5- 040 -03 located in the area of Frates Road and the railroad spur. 2) Proposed rezoning from M -L to R -M -G for A.P. 7- 422 -07 located adjacent to U.S. High- way :101 in the area of Stony Point Road and Denman Road. 3) Proposed rezoning from C -H to R -M -G for AcPE 5- 030 -20 Located at the intersection of Lakeville Highway and Perry Road. ADJOURNMENT: M I N U T E S PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER;20, 1973 REGULAR MEETING 7:3.0 P.M.: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA,, CALIFORNIA PRESENT: .Comm. Balshaw; Bond, Bellovich, Matted, Popp, Waters *Comm. Balshaw 'departed at 8:30 p.m,. ABSENT: Comma Hiiligoss STAFF: Frank B. Gray, Acting Director of Community Development APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of November 6, 1973 were approved as submitted. ASSIGNMENT OF Comm. Carl P. Bellovich was welcomed asla new NEW COMMISSIONER: member of the Planning Commission, having been appointed on November 19,, 1973 to replace Comm. Hood. CORRESPONDENCE: Petaluma,Plaza. Signs Mr. Gray advised the Commission he had been in contact with the President of the Petaluma Plaza Merchants Association and had been informed that they would need three days of dry weather in order to paint over the illegal signs • at the rear of the buildings. He further advised that this was in relation to Walgreens only, and that it was up to each individual tenant who contracted to have the signs painted to have them removed. M & M I,ce Vending Machine Company Mr. Gray read a certified letter that had been sent to Mr. Moran informing him that if he had not complied with the conditions of Use Permit Ul -73 by tonights meeting, he was requested to appear and show cause why the Use Permit should not be revoked and further legal action taken. - Shell Oil Company Mr. Gray informed the Commission that letter had been to Shell Oil Company regarding their rotating sign on Lakeville !Street which is in violation of the Zoning Ordinance 'and not in conformahce with the site design condi- ti:ons of approval.. They were informed to either weld or bolt the sign in place to make it stationary, and after completion to call for an inspection by the 'Building Department. Mr. Gray advised the Commission that he had , not heard from Shell Oil Company but would follow up on the matter. EIR Seminar Chairman Bond asked those who attended • the EIR Seminar on November 17, 1973 if they had any comments to make regarding it. Comm. Balshaw replied that the revisions to the EIR guidelines Petaluma'City Planning Commission Minutes, November 20, 1973 ' had not been completed in time for the Seminar. He felt the city h'ad a fairly reasonable pro - cedure already established but felt there should be an input to the draft EIR's and also that the public should be - able to review the EIR's. Mr. Gray replied that under the City's procedures we do have an input to the draft EIR -'s as the Planning Commission Minutes, City Council Minutes, and any other sub- sequent materials: are added to the EIR to make it complete. Also, he informed the Commission that the could review the EIR's in the Planning Department, if they wanted - a.copy one could be obtained for a fee. The seemingly excessive cost of the preparation of an EIR was discussed and it was suggested that a study session be held to determine exactly what would be required in an EIR to keep down both the input volume and the cost. GARY STOKES & Mr. Gray reminded the.Commission that at the previous - YOUNG - meeting they had accepted the revisions to the EIR REZONING Z''26 -73: for this project, and he read the portion of the ­staff report relating to the rezoning request. The Publc'Hearng was opened.and Mr. Stokes addressed the Commission and dk` §played the site plans. He explained to the- Commission that the Commercial development request was for a portion of a 48 -acre parcel on which an application is on file with the City for a Planned Community development on the entire parcel. This is broken down into approx- mately 3 acres of commercial, 8 acres of duplexes, 1 acre of multiple units,. and 3.6 acres of R -1 siftgle= family clusters. Mr:•'Stokes informed the Board that the architect would do some redesigning to eliminate some of the excess parking spaces and put in additional land- scaping before site design review. He also added that they would make room for bicycle parking near the stores, since the proposed Planned Community contained extensive bicycle paths. Mr. Stokes advised that the architectural design was compatible with the proposed surrounding develop - ment and the landscaping would blend in with the entire development. Twenty -eight duplexes were planned to surround the commercial portion and they would be of a compatible design. Comm. Popp asked Mr. Stokes if he was aware of the industrial plant going in across Lakeville Highway and- he replied that he 'was not. -2- 4 Petaluma City Planning Commission Minutes, November." 0, 1973 Mr. Gray advised - *the Commission that this proposed commercial development would also serve the South McDowell Blvd, area, and its economic dependency would therefore not rely solely on the residential - development proposed. No comments were made from the audience and the Public Hearing was closed. Comm. Balshaw made a motion to approve the re- quested' -N rezoning - and Comm. Popp seconded the - motion. AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 MODIFICA THE 'MAST .ZONING: Area #50 NS TO Mr. 'Gray advised the Commission that three modi- PLAN OF �. fications to the Master Plan of Zoning were necessary - to - make it consistent with the General Plan and the EDP Proposed rezoning from M -G to M -L for A.P. #5- 040 -03 loca:ted•in the of .FiAtes Road and the railroad spur• Mr. -'Gray read the staff report regarding this pro - posed rezoning and -the Public Hearing was opened. Mrs:•Cader Budde addressed the Commission and in- " 'forme`0' them ° she .was the owner 'of the parcel and was • anxiou's'to keep it in M - G' zoning. She advised the Commission tha the trucking firm occupying the site was only a sub- tenant as it is leased to Darling Delaware Company. Mrs. Budde stated she did not feel this site would be activated for in- dustrial usage, such ass a foundry, in the future. Mr. Gray explained to the Commission that the only reason the parcel was zoned M -G was because a heavy ... .- - industrial usage existed at the time .the. Zoning Ordinance was drafted; however, the heavy industrial use.has since been discontinued. He added that this parcel was surrounded by M -L zoning and that future mdevelo ers would not want the p_ possibility of a heavy industrial use being located next 'to them. Mrs. Budde - .stated she felt the property was more valuable to her as M -G and she did not feel the zoning of this parcel was detrimental to other developers as no one had ever contacted her. Mr. Gray replied that he knew of specific instances where this in fact had been a negative consideration. He informed Mrs.. Budde that the tallow factory would become a non- conforming existing use if the parcel was re- zoned to M -L and she could continue her relationship with Darling Delaware on that basis. -3- F Petaluma City Planning Commission 'Minutes, November 20, 1973 Mr. Gray° explained that the °rezoning was requested at th;i,s' time because the justification for M -G no longer •exists, and the parcel should be brought into conformity with adjacent Lands. The uses allowed. .in�both­the M -G and M - districts were read from the•Zoning ordinance and it was explained to Mrs. Budde that it was quite pos the M - zoning would prove to be more beneficial to her. The Public Hearing was closed. Comm. Balshaw made,the mot-ion - to rezone the parcel from•M -G to M -L District and Comm. Waters seconded the motion. AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 Area #51 :: Propo'sed rezoning from.0 - to R - - for A.P. #5- 030 -20 located at the intersection of Lakeville I , Highway and Perry Road: a Mr. Gray.read the staff report for this area and - the P ublic Hearing was opened.. _r F. W. Wood;, owner of L:ittlewoods Mobile Villa • located on the parcel considered for rezoning, addressed th -e. Commission.. He wished to know what effect the rezoning would have on.his property and if it would raise his taxes. It was explained to him that the R -M -G zoning was the only zoning .distr -ict in which mobilehome parks are permitted .and that under the current M -L zoning the mobilehome park was a non - conforming use. If rezoning was approved it would not affect the usage °of his land, - but would make it a conforming use and therefore pillow him to make. improvements if he so desired. It was the Commissions belief that it would not change ithe`.tax situation as the use would still be the same but that this was strictly a function of the assessors . The'Public Hearing was closed and Comm. Waters made the motion to approve the re- zoning change from C - to R - - G. The motion was .seconded by Comm. Bellovich. AYES 5 NOES' 0 ABSENT 2. Area #52 Proposed rezoning from M -L to 'R - -G for A.P. 1 #7 -07 located "adjacent to U.S. Highway 101 in the area of Stony Point Road,and Denman Road: The staff report was read and it was noted that 4 this change was necessary for the same reason as I -4- I w t Petaluma -City Planning Commission Minutes, `November i20,, 1973 Area #51,, as the .parcel contained an existing i mobilehome.park. The•Pub1ic Hearing was opened. No comments were offered, from the audience and the Public Hearing wa's closed. Comm.. Bellovich made the motion to approve the ~" rezoning °from M -L to R -M' -G and Comm. Popp seconded the motion. AYES 5, NOES 0 ABSENT 2 OTHER BUSINESS:. M & Ice Ve_'nding Machine Company .Mr. ° Gray gave tz ommission a brief rundown of the history of the granting of'`Use Permit U1 -73 and the conditions of approval attached to it. He also cited the problems encountered with the applicant in meeting these con;d- iti.ons and informed the Commission that the letter to Mr. Moran had been written with the guidance of the City Attorney. It was noted that Mr. Moran had not appeared before the Commission this evening as requested to show cause for his noncompliance. A short discussion followed after which Comm. Waters made the motion to revoke Use Permit U1 -73 and requested the City Attorney to draw up the necessary documents to be signed at the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Comm. Popp. AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 2 Petaluma Plaza Shoppping.Center Signs A discussion ensued as to what follow -up would be done regarding the removal of the sign`s' on the rear of the buildings at the shopping center. It was deter - mined to defer the matter until the next Planning Commission meeting to allow the tenants a 'possible three days with no rain to' remove the signs and repaint. Comm. Waters informed the Commission that some time. ag,o -i.t was a problem in the State of California that owners of run down buildings would cease to pay taxes on them and the State would then take title <to them. The State, City or community would then `be. stuck with hauling them away. He added that considerable legislature was proposed to amend . the'tax law on this so that th9re would be some of -5- i Petaluma Planning Commission Minutes, November 20, 1973 holding the owner of the building liable for the property even after it became an eyesore. .Mr.. Gray was ques- tioned if any such legi been effected, and he replied that he would check " with the City Attorney and have a report for the next meeting. Comm. Mattei referred to,a.,document from the League of California Citie entitled "H ighlights of 1973 " Leg :slattre Affecting Cities.," AB 2610 by Wilson listed. therein was a "pro.potal- to require City - compensation for diminution in market value of real property as a result of- rezoning. As a represen- tatve of the taxpayer, Comm,. M�attei felt it should be Looked into as we do not want to pay any more taxes. Mr. Gray replied that.- he knew s -ome of the history be the bill but did not know the - status. He also mentioned SB90, which if passed by the State would prevent the:State from passing the cost on to the ;City,, and, therefore it would fall back on the State to difference. Mr. Gray informed the Commission he would get a copy of AB 26`10 when 0' available: Mr. Gray informed the Commission that the Residen- tial Development Evaluation.Board was on schedule and the first count.of the votes would be published on November 2.1, 1973. ADJOU NT : There 'being no further business, at 8 :55 p.m. i Atte ' r the meeting adjourned Vice Chairman r