Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 03/21/1978® e ., '0 REGULAR ;MEETING MARCH '11, 1978 CITY .COUNCIL;., CHAMBERS' 7:30.P CITY HALL x , PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA The Planning Comtm'ssiori= ~encourages = =appl cants•ox-their representative 'to be aVailable'..at the:. meeting s:.to..: :answer•.:.q.uest -ions, .so;.,that agenda items .need be, deferred_,to..a; later -date 4 due, -to a;- lack.of._pertinent information, ` PLEDGE ,ALLEGIANCE TO THE ,FLAG ROLL. CALL Co=...:Balshaw , Head Horciza Lavin ` Shearer : Waite STAFF:: Ronald:_ F . H_a17 ,,...;Planning 'Dir:ector APPROVAL. OF MINUTES:. CORRESPONDENCE: KEN DURLING- E.1. Q. 1. Public. Hearin:g:to,.evarluate the:,Ehvironmerital, EVALUATTON /REZONING Impact. Questionna he.'far a _prop.osed rezoning FROM - R 1 -6,500 TO of the - property located at:•735 H''Street and R C- (COMPACT`.:RESIDENTIAt)./ 724-1 Street and ; pr -o,posed development 'of a SITE' DESIGN: REVIEW': duplex -and:�sangle- family, dwelling. 2. Public' „Hearing to consider :anf::£application to rezone ,:the_4b,6ve_ proprerty'fr.om R- 1--6:,500 to R -C • (Compact Residential) ..,._. 3. Site Design%of proposed: -- project. SCEN.IC.;LAND PROPERTIES- Pub - Hearing.:to corFsj�ker -? t ie'.pr,o:posed rezoning AND, of appraxmatelj;.l8':cresr , fram:Study Zone to REZONING” FROM STUDY, =ZONE._ . PUD (Played Un;te: located at T.O. 'PUD (P,LANNED UNIT . 1051 Petaluma Blvd° :South. DEVELOPMENT): (continued).. FEATURE, - COMES (SUNRISE,, Review .of'Tentative, for Sunrise SUBDIVISION„ PHASE' .I=I;).'. Subdivision P,hase..II- ,to;..be located. on North TENTATIVE',_SUBDIVISION; - McDowell Blvd adjacent to 'Candlewood Mobile MAP Home Park. PETALUMA'PLANNING COMMISSION I. MARCH 2 "1, 19'78 AGENDA s s GOULT: ....GEORGE AR AMENDED: _ 3 Public , Hear:in g tto evaluate: an Amended E.. I . Q , ;EVALUATION /' .` ,Enviroriment;al .Imp ac - Questionnaire for . a. REZONING. FROM ,R 1 6 500. . "` propgsed rezoning . of approxs.mately. 1 z, acres, TO :PUD '(PLANNED UNIT located on..the .:northwes,t side of Caul'f,ield DEUELOPMENT)� /.S'ITE DESIGN Lane `between South McD;otael.l,B'lvd and Park REVIEW: ,, T Lane. Z " 2. Public Hearing,. to consider -1.:,the' prop'os'ed rezoning :applicatib'ii- , from. - R=-1- ..6,,500 to PUD (Planned:Unit Develo,pment), 3. Site Design Review of:'the, ;proposed pro3 ee KELLY WERRELL 'E I;. Q EVALTJATIONr /USE PERMIT 1..- Pub lie• Hearing ,to. evaluate the Environmental /SITE „DE.ShGN Impact .Q,uest�ionnacre.-for a. proposed retail RE41EWT' wh and; ohesale i tine. r di tibu'tion:, siieetmetal ., f'4bric!ation..And ,sales sw'imm ng.. service, boat sales .and service,, and:••indoor and outdoor storage Iat 611 -615 ;Petaluma Blvd. No:r,tfi., 2,. Public Rearing to consider -a 'Use P..:ermit for the proposed p,roj.ect. 3. �Si te, Desi -gn °,Review of :the.- .proj.ect. ADJOURN MENY: D'BY NQ OFF-ICIA) UNTIL APPROVE' THE,.PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION MI•NUTE'S PETALUMA PLANNING, COMMI'SS;ION " MARCH 21, 1978 REGULAR MEETING: 7 :30 P.M.` CITY-.'COUNCIL'-CHAMBERS,, CITY`;,HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA PRESENT': Comm.. Balshawy. Lavin-, Shearer 'Waite ABSENT:'! Comma Head,. Hor-'ciza STAFF.:;.', Ronald..:F. Hall, i� Planning Director APPROVAL; OF.'MINUTES:' The': 'minutes of the meeting of' _February 28, 1978, approved as submitted: The minutes of March 7, 197$., were'approved as corrected. Page 3, paragraph 4, f� should - read 411 acre ' park `site . . KEN DURLING- E.I.Q. This° item, was removed 'from the :Agenda at 'the request EVAL ATION /REZONING, of the applicant. ' FROM R-1 76 TO R -t (COMPACT: RESIDENTIAL) /SITE DESIGN REVIEW: SCENIC.' P.ROPERTIES'- Mr. Hall 'informed„ the Commission that` the''developers REZONING FROM 1 had no;t completed `their amended application for a PUD ZONE TO PUD (PLANNED subiri ttal 'as requested by the 'Planning' Commission' on UNIT DEVELOPMENT) ;!` ` .Feb'r iary .2'2, .197$.. Continued Ak general discussion took place regarding the develop- ment. 14ow.evef 'the disco "sslori was inadmissible'a's testimony since the amended plan ;was.not legally 'before the Commission. (Tile City Attorney advises that the hearing shall•be readvertised.) FEATURE HOMES .(SUNRhSE "Mr. °Hall explained the request by - Jeff: Cohen for SUBDIVI SION PHASE 11) Feature Homes tonsid'er,•the'Tentative Subdivision TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION, Map for the • Sunrise Subd'ivision Phase II development MAP': 1oca"t:ed on North McDowell Blvd;: near Dyn_am ;c Street. The proposal•is to 'subdivide the 6.1 acre site into 37 single - family lots. Marty `M `ller; .MacKay� & S'omps, stated the 3 x- '6 box culvert would be. developed With ,a larger. structure to take" `the drainage and. °thete 'would' not', be' any work done, in. the channel. Comm.'-Shearer: staae'd..it - was 'the.consensus, that a meandering path would-be installed along the peripheral of;:Sunr se Parkway and,.that there would be -l- , Petaluma City Planning Commission - Minutes, 'March '21, 1978 FEATURE-HOMES (;SUNRISE random `tree planting along the perimeter and open SUBDIVISION.PgW IT) space would - e provided- as a' area. TENTATIVE SUBDIVIS'IQN MAP Comm. Shearer moved:•to recommend apprcval the = {Continued;)'; Tbn- t'ative Map for .Phase II of the :Sunrise, Subdivision to the City Council with conditions : of -as , recommended. by the Planning• staff P : and .City Engineer with the following change., The motion was;s_econded by .Comm. Lavin.. The motion carried with -4 affirmaitve and 2 absentee" votes;: Condition 1.9' add A, meandering asphalt, sidewalk -shall be , installed along theJ periphery of ;Sunrise Parkway. E I EVALUATION /. rezone approximately 1:.3 acres lacatedgo Goular,t.to GEORGE GOULART- AMENDED Mr. Hall ,ex lained there uest b Geor. e Q n. `the north REZQNIN& FROM west - sid'e .of •Caulfield, Lane between Park Lane and R= :1 - 50.0 TO 'PUD South .,McDowell from, ,R 1- :6;,_5.00 to PUD '(Planned Unit (PLANNED UNIT: Development); The proposed development consists of one DEV.,ELOPMENT),/SITE duplex - designed with townhouse units facing South,' DESIGN, REVIEW.- - McDowell Blvd., one, detached one story single - family home facing Caulfield -Lane, ; four §Ingle - family homes attached in ,groups of two facing Caulfield. Lane, and - one two story, detached single.-family home front ng on Park Lane. A ,2 -car garage 'is proposed for each single- family home;, a 'single. car: garage, for each duplex- unit, - with•dn additional uncovered space in - the dr Vewa,y Access'to the single family homes would be provided off of Caulfield Lane. There are curren't'ly 34 driveway cuts on, Caulfield Lane which. serve the-existing tures; however, to serve the..proposed project, the location. of, the d_r veways.. have to: be moved. The applicant proposes•to widen .Caulfield Lane td rovide, on- .street parking.. Comm. Shearer stated that a roll =type garage door would•be more ,fear ble•:on. the slior'ter driveway,s,.: The developer would .prov_de landscaping, in. the front, side and rear of the, two .corner lots and- the front . ,yards of the lots fronting on, Caulfield 'Lan_'e, ,and landscaping to. th'e rear . property would be left to the - discretion of: the tenants,. Comm. Ba'lsl aw explained when the :City' acquired, the : st'rip `.of wand for the widening of Caulfield Lane;, access control onto Caulfield had -not - been ac q:uired:.. He- asked if the .,City Attorney indicated - that. driuewayf .c - ,uts:;along Caulfield were permissible. Barry Parkinson, attorney -at -law, stated there..• are. no legal restrictions, imposed•on the property Tom Har- gis,,Assistarit•City Engineer, y y, . , - .therefore the' City ;cannot deny this.applicant Caulfield. access The Public - Hearing °to , consider the 'Environmental Impact °..Questionnaire .was opened. •No: comments were offered, from the audience "and' the-Pub lic Hear -ing, was closed, Comm. Shearer moved to, dir:ec.t the Planning Director ,to prepare and,post an.. Amended- Negative Declaration for the project. .The motion was, seconded by Comm. Lavin. The motion carried ` 4 a- fifirmative and 2 absentee votes -2= • Fe'taluma City Planning Commission. I Minutes, March 21, G EORGE The Public ' Hearing was. opened to consider the proposed P lanned- EVALU ATION/ Unit-" beye, apment_xezoning. REZONING FROM,,*, R -1 6 -,5;00 TO PUP Nngy llock .d Bu 1 1,431 Miaadow..L.ark, repr&senting the . . �1 I ­ - : - - k- (PLANNED. UNIT nei,ghbors,, stated they are, in' favor of the design, and DEVELOPMENT )[SITE had no objection to'the•property having access onto DESIGN, REVIEW' Caulfield Lane. Bruce Nels'on 111721 Park Lane,, spoke (Continued)': in faVot.of the plan, and stated the driveways, on. Caulfidld should n'ot,be 'much of problem. 1 gth driveways , A, problem and roll-up Comm.'. Walite stated the short en co qu d be ga:rage�'aoo,rs would be , a more -a ptable. riihson, explained d Mr Pa that Caulfield would- widened to give another six to eight fo buffer zone for - cars backing onto Caulfield. The Public, Hearing was closed.-., Mr, Hall explained the standard drive,K I ay is generally.'25' feet measured from the',, edge of sidewalk'; i i e* end f re -, " moved tQ,-- approval o the quested PU.D o .,.'rezn7ing to, the City. Council with- the,specific findings as stated. in Exhibit B,.'. . The,m'otion was seconded by Comm. Shearer. The motion carried with..4 affirmative and 2 4bsentee votes. ;Comm. Lavin moved , to: approve the site, .design , f o r . the'Planned Unit Development with &onditions of approval as recomifended­by the staf and modified by the Architectural and. Slte Des Review Committee with, the.jollowing changes. The motion was seconded by Comm.. 'Shearer.' The mat-ion carried with 4 affirm- ativeJand 2,- absentee. votes. Condition 9 add All driveways With less. than 25 back 0 hav&.a roll-r-up garage door. feet - .ftbm the house to KELLY, Mr..Hall explained ' the request by Kelly Werrell for a EVALUATION/USE PERMIT tire distributorship.,. indoor and outdoor storage, REQUEST/SITE.DESIGN, sheetihetal fabrication and sales, swimming pool and REVIEW1' patio furniture sales,' and boat sales and service to be located at' 611 -617 Petaluma Blvd. North. A 15-foot access easement serves the northwest side of the one acre . parcel t0' West Street. There, are two drivewa ys­serving the site. Most of the,width'of the northern driveway is located on•the ad-tacent property and has been used j by the two..,properties. The joint driveway tends for saf ef' .;If ta-f f ic�.,mbvement -. on-,.sit-e and on Petaluma Blvd.. North. Comm. - Shearer suggested that the rear portion of the property. have a dust free surface and the-wiotk shQuld.b.e accomplished at are,asonable,,,tim.e,.j Th,.e. Appli- cant. stated theretis approximately 50 feet that would-have to,-be gravefed, and he dop�,.s not intend to gravel the entire a-rea,. The whole parking area would-'be grayeledup:to.where,thle cars back up and turn around. The back quadrant where,tires will-be. stored be dirt and the area.fenced. We want'- only 4, portion in and not the entire property. Comm. Shearer stated that the brick 'planter along the .front of the-building should be extended to soften the - building:. The Public,Hearing was opened' to consider the Environmental Impact -Question- nairei. No comments-were from the the Public Hearing was OR -3- Petaluma - City Planning.'Commission Minutes, .March 21, 1978 KELLY'WERRELL E Q. closed: Comm., Lavin moved to direct the Planning EVALUATION/USE PERMIT' Director- to prepare and post a Negative Dec_laratori ,REQUEST /SI-TE! DESIGN for 'the: proJeet. The motion was - seconded, by Comm: ' REVIEW Shearer. The motion carried by 4 °a-ffirmative and - 2` (,Continued.). absentee, votes' y The Public Hearing was opened to consider the Use Permit,. No comments were of'f'ered from the audience' an'd the Publ'ie :Hearing, was closed: Comm. Shearer explained Oie reason the rear property was 'required t;q be land scap'ed was because; of -the single - f amily residences "that `boarder the property and the property interior. that can b.e from the private.residen�es.,- Comm. Shearer moved; to grant the Use;.'P.ermit to allow for a retail dr'd w holesale' tire distribution, sheetmetal fabrication and, : sa1es, swimming `pool sere- 'ice .boat sites service, and ;indoor, and outdoor storage The motion :was sec onded" by 'Comm. Balshaw. The mo'tion.' carried with 3 affirmativer- 1 negative' and . '2 ab's'entee Votes. Comm. Shearer moved to.approve, the site des'ign' esign. for the p.ro,posed'project with :conditions, of approva °l as recommended by the s;taf -f and modified by the Ar- ,chi t'ectural - an'd' Site Design. Review - Committee., with the following, change:. The- !' motion,was seconded by Comm. Balshaw: - The motion carried with `3 affirmative, 1 negative and .2 :absentee votes,.' Condition_ 9' add :Details of all landscaping,,, including -the` extension ' :o'f the planter box along: the building front, parking and loading surface improvement 0 and .any other recommended changes in -the site plan shall be submitted to ithe. Planning ' Director for verification prior, to occupancy of the property. ADJOURNMENT.' - There being -no 'further business, the 'meeting a' dj burned at. 10':'50 ;p -. m:: Chairman Attes.t+• o • "__` "`'`' -?' ' <xe -4-