HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/07/1977M. I N .U; 'T. E, ,S
„ . 'I
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION'. JUNE ,7 , 1917'
REGULAR'MEETING: .7.:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS;;CITY HALL. PETALUMA,, CALIFORNIA
PRESENT:: 'Comm. Bond* Daly,, Ha;rbersoni; y Head, ,.Horciza Poipp
Arr':; *7',:.35 , ** 7 : 5�5p o,ino ); Comm . Da. y, excused '9 : 30 'p.m.
..
ABSENT;: Comm. ,Wright
STAFF;;; Ronald F. Hall, Planning Director
APPROVAL OF MINUTE`S° The minutes of 'the `meeting of ,May 3 were approved as
corrected;. The, minutes ,of the meetings of May 1.0' and
May 17, 19',77, were approved as sulimtted
CORRE'SPONDENCE Mr.,: Hall - explained a request t the Sonoma County Board
of 'Supervisors , :had been received from a group of pr_`o
perty owners and investors t'o.;d`esignate= approximately
::2 200 acres : of land:, :at • the intersection of ;State, Highway 37 (Black. ,,Point , .cut_,
off'). and .Stmt;° Highway 116 for future industrial and commercial uses.
Comm. Head questioned .the intent of the developers Mr. Hall
developers did not, elaborate on what'` they "would build_ in the proposed ind'us-
t rial` p ark. Comm. Popp moved to direct the, ,Planning .:Dire_ctor to - forward a
resolution tQ- -Sonoma. County Board of 'Supervisors'.:to' oppose the requestL to
•
designate -'ands locate ;d at -the Highway 37/`116, intersection for industrial and
cgmmer;cial -uses .as it..woul'd' be detrimental; to PetAlumdj The motion was sec-
onded' by Comm. •;Daly e .
AYES .•3 NQES l: ABSENT; 3.
s
CONS Elk, - CALENDAR ,
Agenda Item #1
Agenda .Item #2'
Agenda - Item• #3
Agenda item #4
The motion was made; by C'omm�. Popp:, 'seconded by Comm.
Daly to ,approve Items 2, -3 and 4, and• ;Item 1 .. with . he deletion of Condition #31.. Motion was carried- unanimously.
William.McDevitt; Negative Decla rat ion,and Site'Desi,-gr
Re "s. 5:467;; .approving adtm inistrative :off ice sand parking
lot on -North, Mtbowell Blvd. near Scott Stxee.t...
Site Design ,Res. 5.,464-, - approving dwelling unit to ,be
located at 310: `Bas_sett S;tteet,', applicant'W: 'G'." Ed`ward,.
.Negative Declaration' and 13ite.._Desi•94 Res,. 6.468, apftdv
,ing carpet salesI-bu ld n'g of &tu and Lumsden;, to.
b'e:t lo at .32 7 .'Lakeville .Highway.
•Casa. de Arroyo #2 Res. 18 -77 -.approval.�'of .Final
Subdiv'i'sion `Map. Res. 19 -77 abandonment of a portion
of a portion of .Old L "Road. Res. 20: - 77 aban
�donment, of a portion of , .SouthIMcDowell Blvd - - ":
-1- .
P:ETALUMA G1TY..PLA1"1 ING, COMMISSION,.MI.NUTES, JUNE' 7, 1977,
KEN', ZAMV;IL- APPEAL TO .Mr. ;Hall explained .the request of Ken Zamv -il to' appeal
PLANNING ^COMMISSION:/ Conditions 14 , 3; and °4: for a proposed two. lot =:split. at
PARCEL MAP CONDITIONS':' `825 B Avenue. Cond tion,l 's
states - "The st•re'e
dedication across: the frontage.of the property sh.all,be
made to ;th:e. City of Petaluma, in order to provide a 43 -,
foot half width right- 'of "way ; '� The appl.ic`ant stated the dedication would,•
conflict, with the recent ;sewage work in' which two. :grinder ,p 'wer-e inst'all:ed
on -the northeastern edge of the`proper;t'y. He therefore requested they dedica-
tion be limited;-,to, the - area . in front of the �pump.s Condlti O'n 3' 'states ",The
pro osoadwa ' s_erve Lot 2' is-
P . ed 15 -foot . r y and public utilities eas'ement., to s
roadwau rivate utilities easement alon ro,ert -foot; wide. q. The requi.rement ; is that the subdivider :.vide a 2
y P. g property y line Of Lot::
1 -to provide 'access an_d' utilities to, Lot-2.." Condition 4 states "!I£ the
private: ~`roadway will b`e providirig,..access to . 'the garage. on..Lot; .1 and 'Lot '2 the
app'l' cant shall s,u_bmit ;a letter -to tie PlYannng Comers ion•. requesting. `perms
=ion ..to - provide access to t.wo <;lots over' a p;rvate.•str.eet, .and p,rva'te - stree.t.
improvement ;p,lans '(20- .foot> width) and 'a private `stree'v maintenance agreements"
Comma Head questioned i.f' th`e applican is required to, ded Cate a 43 foot
.right -of, 'way? M'r, ., Hall e�p`lained the' - right -c f. =way is 'measured :from :the. 'center
of the s',treet and 13 feet, would sbe. ta from. the property. Comm, , Ho,r,ciza
stated the • requirdment that pro be `dedicated t'o the City wfibb a devel-
opinent is proposed is ; "so that fife protection equipment :will:`have. access '
bil °it, ;to , the; property..
Ken• Zanivsl stated he shad City guidance when the sewage pump were installed
March, 1.977.: He did not believe it -was justifiable -'to dedicate 'this portion
of the street -and relocate these �pumpso Mr. Zama11 state", t was feasible "t:o
have 'two driveways on 'the property.. He preferred widening the. existing.dr:.ve,
way to ;20 .feet., Comm. ;Popp .e -pla n`ed, that since this was an :.existing ,piece o f
property . with` improvements; a variance; would, be. a reasonable request. Mr,.
Hall, stated. the .ins`tallatioq of" the ;sewage ,pumps, was not tied in -with, the
parcel s and dedic°a'tion. O�t:h e' erwis -the city staff . would have worked
together with the. applicant-; ' Comm;, P'opp stated' the, widening o •Bodega Avenue
`would' be, sometime ,n the future and-buildings ,in the right -of' -way would lave
to. be removed. at, `that time. C fraft" Head explai:n'ed. the property 'then would. be
considered "eminent, domain and the. : applicant would, he 'reimbursed for'.the .right-
of -wa take°' Mr. Zamvi
y' 1 asked tfiat, 'h`e •be ,gr,anted an easement oyes the sewage
pump`s Mr :. Ha11 indicated ,that this was ?a reasonable.req,uee anal could pos
.
sable be granted; Comm,. Popp moved. ^to recommend - the City Council- approval,
of, the; 4.3 -foot street ',dedication across ithle frontage of the property with the
prxov�s o;n that an easement be pr.oV!d'ed "fbr the sewage pumps +,, 'the app.l < icant
make appl.icat. on for a, private is .ree.t and a, variance to the-Planning ',Commi.'s-
si
'on .f'or: 'widening; of the: existing- drv:eway'o . Th:e emotion. was seconded by Comm,, .
Bond
ABSENT
4
; .
, j
% 0
PETALUMA'CITY •RLANNING COMMISSION 'MINUTES, JUNE- 1977
p1ain V
SAIYERIO' DI TOMASO- Mr. Ha explained -the `r-6quest by Sa, erio 1)L T' 0 maso to
APPEAt'TO PLANNING I a peal Parcel map Conditions #2 and #4 fora three-lot
COMMISSION /PARCEL split of approximately..',2.12 acres of land located at
-'MAP CONDITIONS,:' 835 Bodega Avenue,,- Condition #2 -,states "Street dedic
tion Shall be Made on the Bodeg4 Avenue frontage to
'. . - 4 11
..give.th.e City a 43 fo ot half street- width sectl. on.
The located on-7 feet
applicant contends the. existing house; on 'the property is
Of the - ,proposed: dedication- ' Condi:tion -ti,4 "Pu,blic improvements shall be
The required prior to the. .1s-su -of a bulldlng, per#ii,t applicant's. agent
states the street improvement requirement•around• the entire frontage is finan-
cially - prohibitive to .develop the two l/ 1, acre <hbmes'ites.. The necessity of
1/2 acre site requirement is very restricti in the R11- 1 6; . zoned area."
Vi Tufts, real estate for the Applicant, , sta r ted the requirement, 11 �that a
30-fo6't half width 'str,ee.t . section be -provided. -the entire length of
WAY Is not feasible as the applicarit is only building on a portion of Bantam
Way. lComm. POPP, stated if street i -tp.rbvbme�nt-s . pare not -required when a -
'f.,prdperty is' proposed for development, Bantam.Wa improved..
Y will-tevet be im
In improving the"street, the A p-licant-is' also , limpar improvin his own property.
o
Mrs. Tufts -further stated the, 43-foot, street dedication_ bt,Bodega Avenue. would
take d . portion of the appjicdnt's house: Mr.Hall.explained that eminent
domain would come•into play ,when the-street i*provement& were installed.
Comm. 'Bond stated this is a Planning,matter and the .legal, -rights should . b e
ney. We talking -dedication for the
handl6d,by an dttor about 41,f'ot
future widening of Bode
ga Avenue and we are, -not %involved in the financial
,as - pectp of the matter. ;Comm: Head asked if these !ac:tions could be held UP
until,a legal opinion could be - obta -ined. Mrs
. Tufts s,.,t-- ted the applicant is
. Willing to - dedicate 36 fe6t_dh Roaega Aven'ue-� Comm. Popp explained the reason
f ot, the 43.-foot right-of-way de-di.,edtion is mtbat the right=of.-way has to be a
&trai i t 6t line with in h 'street. Comm. Hbrciza statedthe Planning
,.:,t e
Commis'sion trying t . o 1. eftf orce �,the rules-as set f orth in the -General Plan and
Zoning, Ordinahc&; we are not financial experts,: not with,
. matters, but with planning matters. Mr. D'i-TPmas,o,stated he was willing to
d 36= -foot half street section on,.B°a, 26 -feet Bantah-Way, and 4
Y
f eet t on the side of hom&.
Comm. Bond moved',thd�t a 0--foot half street' width section 'be dedicated to
t. h the dedication.' The motion
include e� -existing home,, located on 7 feet of
was se.donded by Comma, Popp,
NOES 1 ABSENT.
Comm. 'Popp moved that'd 3 . 0 half street width, section b,e;.dedicated on
tan-tam Way to, ,in the existing home . located ton 4 :feet of the dedication.
The motion- asi seconded by Comm-. Daly.
AYES 5 NOES . 0 ABSENT 2
Comm. Bond moved that; Condition A
be - continued at the 'Planning Commission
Meeting on,J une 15 19477. The motion was seconded by Comm; 'Harberson.
AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT
10 Mr. Hall suggested that- the applicant meet,with department staff to con
- k econoitic bility-. Chairman Horciza,
'ider a f our (4:): -pircel. split fo
,s
as ked..that the . 1( & :G Bus Transportation. item be. heard at this,, time.
-3-
PETALUMA CITY PLANRNG.COMMISSIOIj MINUTES, JUNE'7, 197.7
K & G' BUS TRANSPOR7 Mr., Hall expl "a rie:d the req,ues;t of K' '& G Bu's Transpor
TATION SERVICES- EoI.Qo tation forl a bus s orage yard and' ;maintenance garage at
EVALUATION /'USE. PERMIT, /' 67..Magnolia Avenue'., :'the property has, a metal garage
SITE DESIGN REVIEW: building .which is approximately 6'0' x 1- 50''' of which ' the
applicant Leant will use 'the 'he rear 60' x_ 50. :The :portion of
the garage, closest.to'MagnQli.a. Avenue is; being used by
the City for s "to rage .and' maintenance -o'f the. City buses 'Magnolia Avenue, pro=
vides easy, access: to the site and, the lot is sufficient size -to �p;rovide
ample. °room; for the storage of the si or'eight buses;.
The Public Hear :ng to consider 'the Enuironinental Impact Quest ornnaire ,was
opened. Comm., ;Bond ._questioned why more fencing was not required on the south
side of_ the ,property,. and no fencing was ;required on the west :side,? The,
applicant explained this was 'a drive through area for. the •Ne l-s'en Tr- eight Line
trucksl and. fencing was .not ,feasible," 'The:Public Hearing; was closed.
Comm' 'H:arberson moved, to direct, the P'l'anning Director, to pre pa'*re .and post a
Negative Declaration °f'or the .proj ect. The inot.ion . was seconded by ,Comm 'Po.p.p
AYES` 6 'NOES' 0 ABSENT 1
The Public Hearing to consider the Use-'Permit was opened, No comments were
offered' from the audience and the Publ'•c Hearing was closedd.
Comm. Bond. 'noted that this property is, developing into -a bus complex,, He
asked it `the. applicant could provide` some landscaping; on the property f•roi Cage
on Magnolia Avenue "I,t could be possible if the three transp,pttation companies
could-jointly beautify this'prop'erty
Ggmm•. moved' :to, grant the Use - P'etmi.t to all.o.w 'four a bus - parking and maintenance..
area. The 'motion was; seconded' by 'Comm. ;Popp.,
AYES 6; NOES. 0 ABSENT' l
Comm. Bond moved: to ,approve the, site design for the ,proposed ,proj;ect with.
condkti'ons, of approval as recommended by the staff and 'concurred with by the
Architectural and. Site Des ft Review Committee with the additional provision
that minimal landscaping be provided along the Magnolia Avenue '=frontage of the
p.ro:perty to the satisfaction of the Planning D'i.re,cto:r. The motion was sere
onded by Comm, Popp,.
AYES 6 NOES' 0 ABSENT. .l-
'EINER P,EDERSEN ='E I.Q. a Mr.. Hall explained, the request of Ener P,.edersen. to
'EVALUATION /PREZONING prezone 4.'7 acres located at 1003 Western
FROM COUNTY. AGRI1 TO Avenue County 'A-1 B -.5 to City'R�1-'20.,000, single
CITY R120,000 family. residential, 2.0, 000 square feet minimum lot
si.ze:,. _The site slopes'•upward' from 'Western Avenue at an.
average of 15 - .20% and is 'improved with a: tsing.l'e= family
residential structure and some accessory structures. Access to the 'existing
family structure is provided by .a' gravel :driveway off Western - Avenue.
•
o
PETALUMA CIT-Y"PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES E
`JUN T, 1977
EINER PEDERSEN-E'..1.1Q. r The Fub�lic. Hearing to cons. der the Environmental Imp
EVALUATION/ PRE ZON ING Qd6stionftaire was,-opened - :Anna Neilseri. "stated. - traf
FROM ,' COUNTY, A.GRI TO on We ' stern Avenue .: would . 1#crj0as1e,. - Calks would have to
CITY R t1- 20.,; make Fa • left turn .0,rvto -thel p roperty at the , curve, on
(Continued'),: Wes s.'erh Avenue.; , Their, property is posted as .a game,
preserve. -and it is, their "intent to keep the i land as a
natural habitat.. People in, the neigh
g_ bp very
sensitive'. to the fact that there is a I wild, j life preserve within. the City..
This deve,ldpinent. would 'hav effect on the wild life. Mr.- J. - Burks.trom
expie§sed co'ncetn about 'thel outcome of the de�er-and''ex-LE�t-ing bird and..
Arainage problems f ro th& creek which r. s through his property. Mr. Edmoftsen
'stated •h"e, would - annex- to the - City .1f this development , were -1allowed. Kay.
Robin representing, Mr. Pedersen-,. -stated there are only thistles -on -the
land. The proposal.,of 20j,000.squ0refee,t would, improve' a good share of - the,
area. The ,people in the area should•not try to. control others in, wha t:. ifidy
want t Pkopetty. the i
,o' do with thei I e property is annexed to the City - y—it
will be' served by City sewer :and `w r. Mt. Hall, iaxpl-a-ined if the prezoning.
is.approvpd -the -EDE will, be changed to refRet, a %suburban low density desig-
nation on this' particular property. The"Pul5lic-iHearing was c:lbsed.
Comm. Popp stated we, are talking about p - laces - to live. This property is
obn and the most likely to be . developed at -the present tiiffe, instead of
hod the • City. Wei'haveto a place for
people Io live, and orderly growth; Tbe,'Vlans on this prop,6rty with 20,,, 000
square f eet lots, show, this- to be an, ideal, spot to live:
Comm. Popp moved-to -direct- the Planning Directqt to prepare and post a..Negative
Detlara for the p roject, The was seconded by Comm. Harberson.
AYE 4, 'NOES 1 ABSENT 2
Comm. Head cast,,a 0 vote an EIR.is needed -on this project. The
Public Hearin I g was opened to consider-, the - 'p , rezbii1-rig.,: Comm. PoPpL stated the
'p ro'ject:.would;'take from -.one to two . to, build. "and this is reason,to
require an EIR the,prezoning,. The Public.Hearing Was closed
Comm. Head moved, that the prezoning be held up in lieu of an•EIR to determine
if the property. could -be: prezoned. The motion died -for lack of a second.
Comm. Popp moved , to� recommerfd apftoval 6f the p ropo§'ed - t- -
A-1 B-5-to City R- , 1 -20, 000 to the �City •Council.. The - motion was - seconded, by
Comm.. Bond.
AYES 4 NOES 1 ABSENT
SIGN,-ORJDINANCE: Mr. Hall explained the Commission -was to ;consider a
modification to the proposed Sign •Qtdinanc& to include
clarification iof !the oxd1nance regar 'to 'non7-
conforming and' illegal. signs, and 'o'ff--site direct -ional , signs.. .'It was' also
noted tha-t of f-sibe, directional signs t educational and govern-'
_gns, were needed �fo
mental. offices. Comm. Bond explained that most: churches attempt -to build, on
N
-5-
m
CITY OF' PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ',, JUNE 7'.; 1977
SIGN ORDINANCE main arterial sgreets The use of` signs, by' s;ixeh '.churches
(continued) : would' not 'be use`f.ul and ch.urc'hes that would r°eq,ure
'this. type -.of_ sign would •b•e located, on off streets away
from an a`rter a'l street,., A hospital and church located
away .from a main: stre-et should have more. than ones directional s ggn. ; Commm
Harbefson stated there_should be two:-signs -arid' a. variance required if other
signs are needed; Mr.. Hall s;t ate d 'would rather look at:•it -as a Use Permit
arid not' .a ydr.iance.' He recommended that one° directi.ona" l 's'ign be. allowed and
further' signs 'be thro.;ugh , the Use 'Permit pzoce:ss.
Comm.. ,Bond mgved. to to to, the City Gounci`l the fol3owin'g amendments. to
the' Sign Ordinance. ,The motion was se'donde.d by :Coming "Harberson.,,
1;. , Non- .Conformi`ng' S .gns lw•i'th,•approved, sign_ perm .ts which_ were•• legal at
Si. ns. the time of co 'but 'which do not px°esent-
conform to the.- :p,rovisibAs of this 6rdlnance •s_hall• be
allowed 7 eo remain ,until such time as
-
2 Illegal Signs
,Unsale., -Ins`ec If 'th'e Chief Build rg Ins:pecto,r -finds that any, sign or
&, ,Illegal ;Signs - ; oth'er advert si.ng istructure i.s' unsaf;e, insecure or has
not been "g ranted _
-ranted a s e -mit', or� is a nenaee to, the
P ubli. c or has been, constructed` or erected' or is being
main t aine.d. 'in violation of the` p'royisions bf' .this
Ordinance,, or -is "unsightly or illeg ble because of`
fading or other physical degeneration of sign face or
through ,faulty or mission.illuminati:oa,. he.''ha:ll:give,
writ en nat to the pertittee thereof (th.e remairide.r
of this section `goes .on to describe, abatement pro --
cedures, ,
3;, Dlre:c, ' Signs
Off= Site.'Signs 'One, ;(1) "pe:rmanen:t directional sign. ident:i`fy ng insts-
tuti.dns_of'.an•educati.orial, religioif&, ch_aritdble
governmental 'or civic. •nature,. not to e:kceed four (4:) ,
;square feet in area a.nd situated 'on stre`eto
Additional. directional signs may` be approved' , siub j.eca , to
the • g- ranting o' :a Us •e . Perini t.
AYES:. 5 ME.S 0, ABSENT, 2.
RICHARD WILLIAMS'` " =- . Mrs Hall 'e pla ned the Tentative 'Sub di,vi:sion.Map was ; to..
E o I Q ;;EVALUATION; / be reviewed for th.e° No,rtb.._. San, Francisco 'Bay Industrial
TENTATIVE MAP:' Park ';Unit: 2' co ' n Asti g of, .a 2'8 -:lot, l:ndustrial ; subd M'
sign. to lie; 'located on North � Mc:Dowell Blvd,. and Trans'"
,port. Way. ' He further •staged t_h. app.lic'ant did not:
for_ese,e any problem in allowing a right- of-way 'fou'tl4e iratercliarige The C .'ty
Engineer and Planning staff' d*s. ssed the n:ee:d fora 50-foot take for an
inter chapge. the, rear o the" property to flare °:out to 100 - -fee;t to .all_ow
for the road surface to• be b,iilt, up' to clear the •101. fxeeway.
-;6-
PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JUNE 7, 1977
RICHARD ,WILLIAMS The Public Hearing, to consider. the Environmental Impact
D. I: EUAI:UAT- -ION .
Q. /, Questionnaire was opened. N9 comments were offered
TENTATIVE MAP from the audience •and,- the .Public Hearing was closed.,
(Continued)
Comm., Head moved to direct the Planning Drector'to
prepare and, post a Negative Declaration for the pro
ject-. The motion was seconded by .Comm. Poppe
AYES' S NOES 0 ABSENT 2
Dick' Williams-, developer, st?a ^ted the 'dedication for the freeway- off -ramp: is a
problem� If CALTRANS agrees, he�.willv:do his best,, to do his part.. He would
like a 1 Sunse;t Clause" and if CALTR&S, cdoes not accept the site for, an: inter
change, :about one acre-:of dedicated property would' - -be reverted back to him.
A reasonable � time frame. would -'be. three years and at that, time CALTRANS could
be petitioned to: determine if an nterchange.would ' be needed here or at anothex
location: Comm. Bond.s'tated f ive years -would be,a more appropriate figure.
Comm. Head moved.to, recommend approval of.tbe. Tentative Map for Unit 2 of the
North•San Francisco Bay Industrial Park to the .City Council with`condit'ions of
approval. as recommended by-the P'lanni:ng staff arid;City Engineer. The motion
was seconded by- Comm. Popp.
AYES 5' NOES 0' ABSENT` 2
ADJOURNMENT. , ere being no further. bus'iness', 'the meeting adjourned
at `
f e:
A too
Cha�i;rinan
Attest
i ,