HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/11/1977M I N U T E S
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 11, 1977
ADJOURNED,MEETING 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
PRESENT: Com. Bond, Head, Harberson, Horciza *, Popp
Waters, Wright
( *arrived 7:55 p.m.)
ABSENT: None
STAFF: i Ronald F. Hall, Planning Director
Fred E. Tarr, Associate Planner
i
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of'December 21, 1976 were approved as sub -
mitted.
CORRESPONDENCE:
Letters received from private,citizens and Petaluma
Schools relevant to the Environmental Design Plan
i
Study.
ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN
Mr. Hall explained that a review and an interpretation
PLAN (197)- 1984):
of the Citizens' Environmental Design Plan Task Force
Committee's recommendations to the EDP were to be under-
taken relevant to policy statements and possible graphic
changes to the EDP map.
This wquld subsequently involve a revision of the text
and graphic changes, where necessary, and include an environmental initial study
and determination, with
public hearings before the Planning Commission and the
City Council. Task Force
Committee recommendations were presented and discussed .
by the Planning Commission
on June 15, 1976. He further explained it is necessary
to differentiate between legitimate policy statements and implementation measures
which should be adopted
independently. It is conceivable that there will not be
substantial changes as
the present EDP has served the City well.
1. TASK!FORCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr. Hall ref erred to the EDP Outline to be used as a framework for discussion
which encompassed questions from the - Planning staff and responses extracted
from the Task Force Committee Report.
Mr. Jim Grossi, a member of the Task Force Committee, stated the Committee
attempted to provide more incentive for development on the west .side, but
did not arrive at a solution for an equal 50 /5 division of housing to be
developed on the east and west side. He.suggested, there be a 1/3 allotment
for the west side, and a 2/3. allotment for the east side. A considerable
amount of improvements have to be made on west side property to bring the
property up to City standards.
i�
-1-
R
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JANUARY 11, 1977 '
2. CITY DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr. Hall stated there are development constraints on the west-side due to
the characte•rist-ics of the land.. The staff is considering a proposal that
the.lot sizes be larger for the west .side. If the allotments are to be
balanced, more land will have to be designated for 'development on the west
side. The land on the east side is relatively flat and'easier•to develop,
but due to the terrain of the west side, additional lands would have to be
used.
John Balshaw, Chairman of the Task Force-Committee,-stated the Committee
considered the provisions of the EDP pertaining to balanced growth for east-
ern and western Petaluma and found it reasonable. It is less'expensive for
a developer to build on the east side because of the flat lands.. People
from the east side feel that schools and roads have been overburdened because
allotments have not been equally balanced.
Phil Palmer, Task Force Committee member,,stated_a.50 /50 ratio_is a better
basis for the east and west. Comm. Harberson stated many people feel the
ratio of 50150 was impractical; in the past the ratio been 30f70,
with east side allotments. Larry Jona's-stated that in 1972 -73 the ratio was
approximately 3:1 with the allocation system showing.600 homes for the east
-side, 194 homes for the west•sde and 11 homes for the central section. Mr.
"`Robert Meyer, City Manager, stated the population of the City is approximately
15,000 residents on each side of the City. The valley side grew faster than
the west side. Most of the vacant lots on the west side, which did not come
under the allotment system have since been developed. He stated one of the •
main concerns wasfproperty on the fringe areas of th "e City requesting City
services. The Planning Commission should predict the`outcome'of development
west of the City.limits particularly in theChapman Lane ar.ea'as the County
is anticipating receiving available Federal funds to install water and .sewage
to this area. Phil Palmer stated people in the-Petaluma Blvd. North-area are
in opposition to annexing to the City.
3. SONOMA COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS
4. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS
A letter had been received from the Petaluma schools. stating there is sufficient
boom to enroll students who may reside in the Westridge Subdivision and Alder -
wood : Subdivision in the Petaluma High School District, however, as -the City
continues; to grow, it may be necessary to change'school'boundary' lines and ex-
tend the school day or year.
Mr. Toby Ross, Sonoma County Planning Department; stated the County does sub-
mit County referrals to the City on matters pertaining to'the General Plan
area.. The staff is working on the Petaluma Blvd. Nortn•'Study and their rec-
ommendations will be submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration,
Land use,' transportation and sewage - disposal will- be' a' consid- ef°ation in the
Petaluma Blvd, North Study. The basis 'for' the "Penr'grove Study 'is the sewage
problem. Penngrove has a potential of 1,800 people, and this would be the
designated figure for annexing to the City. Mr. Ross stated the County is
also working on the Sonoma Mountain and Glierneville 'Studies and these studies
should be completed sometime this summer.
-2-
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JANUARY 11 1977
5. PRIVATE, INTEREST INPUT
Letter received from-George-Merrill requesting the existing EDP be modified
so it will conform to the General Plan whereby his property located on North
McDowell Blvd. be designated •Resid ential -Urban Density, and the subject prop -
erty,be annexed to the City. Letter received from William Joost; property
owner on North McDowell Blvd., stating he was in support of Mr. Merrill's
proposals. Letter received from Barry D. Parkinson, representing property
owned by Aubrey Sanderson located on the northeast side of McDowell Blvd.,
and also on the southeast side of Old Redwood Highway at its intersection
with McDowell Blvd., proposing that the land along the highway be designated
Commercial. Under the EDP, the property is designated Industrial, and the
property in turn is zoned Commercial by the County. The property located
further back from the highway is properly classified Industrial, but a strip
of approximately 200 yards width along the highway should be designated as
Service to permit retail uses which are not included in County Commercial
zoning. Barry . Parkinson stated the property around Wickes Lumber Company,
is currently in the County, revisions to the EDP should include that
the designation for this property provide for Commercial. A letter received
fromlFriedman Bros. stating they had purchased 22- acres on 'Petaluma Blvd.
North, adjoining Wickes Lumber Company, to build a hardware store. Lucy Webb,
real'tor, stated Friedman Bros: would like to have the front portion of their
property designated for Commercial and the back portion of the property for
Light Industrial. A letter received from Willow Creek Properties requesting
a change in the EDP classification of their property bounded by U.S. 101, Old
101 Highway and the driveway entrance to Sonoma Joe's Restaurant and Motel
�. Six to, Highway Commercial. A letter received from Barry Parkinson, repre-
senting Chris Muelrath, Jr., regarding property located on North McDowell
Blvd., near the railroad crossing at McDowell -, requesting the EDP designate
this property for Ifidustrial`or Light Industrial use along with a Service
designation for that portion of the property fronting on North McDowell Blvd.
Mr.,Robert Meyer stated the General Plan specifies this particular area out
to Corona Road be residential, and if this area is changed to Industrial, a
major change will then have to be made in the General Plan and EDP. As far
as control over the land located outside the City limits, the only control
the City has is when a developer wants to apply for City water and sewer
service. It took years to develop the Park located on North
McDowell Blvd. and let's not change this. The industrial Park is zoned
Light Industrial and this together with residential zoning balances the
tax structure. Mr. Parkinson stated that when McDowell Blvd. is extended,
the Merrill property will develop and zoning should be designated for this
property and be included in the EDP.
6. STAFF INPUT
Mr. Hall stated the proposed revisions to the EDP provided by the Planning
staff are mandated. by State law and should be consistent with the General
Plan)
7. PLANNING COMMISSION INPUT AND RESPONSE
The Committee recommended the "infill" of available space within Central
and West Petaluma be increased for an individual builder from 4 to 10 in
order' to encourage builders to accomplish this "infill" and avoid sprawl.
-3-
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JANUARY 11, 1977
E
John Balshaw stated the Committee would like to' be involved in
ation of the EDP particularly in residential and recreational areas. The Com-
mittee did not go into an in- depth study on industry but did feel a domination
by major industries should not be permitted.
Mr. Jonas questioned the recent zoning changes in certain areas: from PUP to
R -1- 6,500, and Agricultural Use to PUD. Comm..'Harberson asked f'Mr. Jonas
was aware of the zoning requirements for PUD and PCD.
8. SPECIFIC DISCUSSION ITEMS (GENERAL DISCUSSION)
Mr. Hall stated that meetings will be held on the Petaluma Blvd.. 'North are.a.
He questioned those present if they felt there is adequate development on
Petaluma Blvd. North. The Committee in their report recommends that strip
commercial and urban sprawl be avoided. Mr. Meyer "stated the County is the
only body who can meet with the people of this area, mainly the County Plann-
ing Commission. This is an area that perhaps has the wrong type of zoning
and the recent septic tank problems have brought the area to the City's
attention. Comm. Bond questioned if a joint study session could be held
between the County and City so that problems in the Petaluma Blvd. North area
could be discussed. Mr. Palmer stated a meeting had been held at Cinnabar
School and attended by people from the area. It was the concensus of opinion
that they did not want to annex to. the City, and no concre e !solutions had
been resolved at the meeting.' Comm. Bond . stated that.to'his knowledge no
further reports had been received from the County as to the septic tank
problems in the area.
A discussion was held on "Just what is the,greenbelt "? Mr. Hall stated it is
more expensive for a developer to,provide bicycle or riding and hiking trails.
Mr. Balshaw stated the Committee . recommended a greenbelt be provided as a break
in the continual building of houses:. We must preserve this visual break and if
this greenbelt is not preserved, houses will be constructed all the way to Old
Adobe Road. Comm. Waters .stated it was the original concept that 'there be a
greenbelt in various locations in the-City. Mr. Grossi stated the EDP had been
in ,pro,cess for the last six years and there are areas where the greenbelt has
been implemented. He - questioned if a ring parkway around the City was feaa,ible.
Mr. Hall stated the concept of a greenbe -lt varies from a linear park to parks
of various widths. A riding or Biking trail could be considered a greenbelt.
The people would have to decide whether a greenbelt should remain in its natural
state or be functional. Mr. Jonas stated the_ 1972 EDP Report defines the green -
belt as a continuous belt of open space for hiking and bicycle " where in
some places the greenbelt would be 5 -feet wide and in other sections the green -
belt would be wider where a park.-would be located. Comm. Popp stated that open
space;.could not-be acquired at one time; we should have open space, but economics
will dictate the type of greenbelt. If we are going to have open space, access
to the property has to 'be provided, or it is not feasible.. Mr. Meyer'questioned
if agricultural land could be considered a gre'enbel't. He asked if a determina-
tion could-be made on the future size and boundaries of the City, Comm. Wright
stated we should bite the bullet and determine the size of the City should
be. Comm, Hor:ciza stated it is up to the Plan.ning'Commission -to• direct develop-
ment and determine what the boundaries of future Petaluma should be.
-4-
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION.MINUTES, JANUARY 11, 1977
Mr. Meyer y questioned how access and roads would be provided through the green-
belt area. At the present time, a developer is proposing.a subdivision and 20
acrest -of the property is. located on,the. other side of the greenbelt, how does
the developer obtain access to the 20 acres? Comm. Head stated if a developer
is required to dedicate land to the City for greenbelt purposes, the price of
this land is tacked onto the price of the homes, whereby home prices are in-
creased so that low income housing will not be available for younger people to
purch4se.
The Task Force Committee presumed that eventual development will-occur outside
of the designated greenbelt, and the greenbelt is considered a necessary open
space,,for the community. There should be a break in residential development
east of the freeway which could only be created by a deliberately created open
spaceJ, However, there was no consensus whether or not this space should be
for public use, contain facilities such as a bike path or park facilities, or
I
if the property should be developed.
The Committee questioned whether or not it is feasible to have a ring parking
on the west side of the City. Mr. Hall stated it is physically possible to
create ring parkway, namely to connect Howard Street to a link between Laurel
I
and Webster Streets and to connect "I" Street with Petaluma Blvd. South. The
staffIfeels these links are necessary, as there should be some type of alterna-
tive circulation pattern for the west side. He further explained a ring park-
way was to provide an alternative means of access for the west side. As devel-
opments continue to grow on the radial streets, traffic is funneled into an
apex of congestion. When plans for a development are presented, segments of
the ring parkway.should be required at that time.
The Committee indicated that the Parks and Recreation Department should review
and develop a specific plan for parks. Mr. Hall questioned if there are park
areas indicated on the plan at the present time that may be mislocated?
Mr. Don Bennett, Services Subcommittee, stated the Committee felt that water,
sewer, k
and transportation problems were being adequately handled, However,
i
implementation of those additional services elements in the EDP, namely, parks,
I
open s I pacei community and natural areas has not been adequate.
Mr. Jonas stated the Parks Commission should decide the type of park appropriate
for each particular subdivision in a particular location, People should be in-
formed before purchasing a home that there will be a park or a jogging trail
behind their home. Homeowners in a subdivision should have input on the type
park-they would like in their neighborhood.
The-Committee felt volunteer work groups should be established to help with
the development of parks. Mr. Meyer stated he was in agreement with having
a volunteer work -force, but that they should work in conjunction with the
Parks Department. Pat Maynard suggested that priorities be given in the EDP
to organizations for use of available parks for league-sports events. Mr.
Meyer added the City is willing to work with volunteers, but sometimes this
type of help hinders a project. Some people say they do not want to pay more
taxes;,' but is is the maintenance of these facilities that is costly. The City
hopes!to utilize a volunteer group to help with the sport field areas.
-5-
PETALUMP. CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JANUARY 11, 1977
The Task Force Committee agreed that the principle problem was the lack of im-
plementation procedures of the EDP and.tlat a permanent EDP Task Force Committee
review the EDP annually or semi- annually and report back to the City.
EAST WASHINGTON Discussion on moratorium on commercial: establishments
STREET MORATORIUM'- on East Washin'gton,Street was postponed and continued
to the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 10 :30 p.m.
Chairman
Attest:
11