Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/06/1977° REGULAR'MEETING'- = JULY 6,, 1977 CITY COUNCIL' CHAMBE_RS.. 7;.3'.0 'P,.`M. CITY. HALL TETALUMA, CALIFORNIA The'Plann;:ing Commission `encour4g' app "l cant §' or ,'their, representative to be, available at - the meetings - -to answer quest. ori .so . no agenda, items need 'be deferred` to 'a later date, due -. to -a, la- ck,..of__..pe,rtinen't information, PL-EDGE-ALLEGIANCE TO THE ,, FLAG ROLL CA.'LL: Comm. Daly Har.berson „ Hea:d _,;._.:_: Horci:za Popp Wright STAFF: Ronald. F. .Hall, Planning: ,Direefior �{ APPROVALI.OF MINUTES: 'CORRESPONDENCE': C0NSENT - CALENDAR'c W'. DAWSON E I Q Evaluation and Site Design: Review -for a proposed storage facility aad- ition.tp an aunomot ve retail stone:, located at 322: - 4th. - Streeto- QANTAS pEVELOPMENT CORP;.OR[ TION Site Design-Review f:or proposed. rev"is.ion to adopted floor and -- elevation p1'a.na - Park Place Subdivision (Phase -I) WTNKLER' FOR 1. P:ubl'ic Hearin&. to,'evaluate:. the Environmental Impart ELMER F'ISK - . I . Q. EVALUATION /REZONING: uesiionna xe for, a p"ro.po:sed rezoning 'from M -L (Light Industrial) to C -H'(Highway. Coimmerci of . property .locat;ed at 5`87,. 80"7 and='809-- L- akwille Street 2.. _ Publ•ic. Hearing`'to, consider the rezoning application • of the- LandSr, of Fisk-and ' others to rezone-approximately . 5 acres from :M -L (t gh� Industrial) to C -H (Highway Commercial) LA,- FRAN,CH.'l, BETTINELLI,. 1 Public Hewing to consider. ..a, variance request,, for MICKELSEN,=r& HIRSHFIELD,/ a five -•foot "rear yard,. SITE `DESTGN: 2 S Des.ign-.. : for a proposed law office to be located at 205 Keller Street. PET "ALUMA'CTTY PLANNING COMMISSION rJULY 6; 1977' AGENDA = ANDREW MICEaLI -E T Q. 1 Hearing t;o evaluate 'the Envrironment,al Impact, EVALUATION /TEN;TATIV'E' Ques ionnaire f,or proposed Miceli Subdivision +. SUBDTU£SION, 'MAP :: - ,. , located• -at 22 Ely . S 2: Modificat -ion to Sub'divisi'on, '0r- dinance Tentative Subdivision. 'Map HAROLD - `WQJC IE'CHOWSKI: R'e 'quest: ,for two (2) year extension- for 'filing f nal, parcel map• on proposed_;l:ot split at 83'1 Madis6n Avenue.: DR. GLENN.KOBY: -E 'I:Q;. EVALUATION /S'ITE DESIGN 1. Hearing to evaluate, the.4Environmental Impact. REVIEW: Que's.tiann'aire f'or a propo eel: medc'a1 of to be located . 'apt -.124 Howard I straet. - 2.. Site Design Review of the project, JONAS SO,USA Cons iderat ion, f a revised reside fti-al ; allownen.t MODIFIED SUBD,IV,ISION v a licat -ion 1 pp� orated. between Sehuma.n Lane and' Ma'gn ALLOCATION; Avenue :' ADJOURNMENT: . .r a; M'I YU.T'E'S PETALUMA.CITY.PLANNING COMMISSION' • REGULAR MEETING CITY_COUNCIL CHAMBERS; CITY^HALL PRESENT:, Comm, Daly; Head, Horc'1za,, Popp, Wright ABSENT Comm,'Harberson STAFF: Ronald F. Hall., Planning: °,Dif°ector JULY '6, 1977 7:"30 P.M. PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA APPROVAA OF MINUTES: Tle, minutes of the meetings of June 15, June 21 and June 23, 1977 were approved as submitted. CORRESPONDENCE: Letter from Dr. Glenn Koby - requesting that his proposal i for a medical office to be 'located at 124 Howard Street be postponed until the meeting of August 2, 1977. Mr. Hall_ stated an interpretation had been received from the City Attorney rel- evant to the request of LaFranch., Mickelsen and Hirshfield for a proposed of- fice building indicating that only one of three (3) variances could be consid- ered, specifically the request for the five -foot rear yard variance. Mr. Hall indicated that three.variance.requests were to be considered, but only one variance had been submitted by the applicant. He asked the applicant if the matter 'should be considered as a complete application at another time. Matt Hudson representing the firm of LaFranchi, Mickelsen and Hirshfield, requested the single matter be considered at this meeting as the,applicant would like to know if'.the Commission would grant a variance for the rear yard before an ap- plication for the other variances is submitted. Mr. Hall informed the Commission that the City Attorney advised that the request for a two year time extension.by Harold Wojciechowski for the filing of a final parcel map for property located at 831 Street was not timely. The ap- plicant should resubmit the tentative map for the project. A fee of $50.00 is required on the filing of an application, but staff would explore the possibil- ity of a fee waiver. The staff had tried to contact Mr. Wojciechowski, but his phone number is unlisted, Comm. Popp moved that the request of Harold _ Woj ciechbwski be withdracan� f- :om- y.the- agenda. 'The motion was seconded by Head. Motion was carried unanimously, CONSENT._.CALENDAR The motion was Comma Popp, seconded by Comm:' Head to appr.ove l and 29 Motion was carried' unanimously Agenda Item #1 C. W. Dawson,'.fNegative Declaration _:and S'ite` Res, 5 465 , � zppro -ving- 4 storage' facility',:add;ition' - to an automot'iv LI s.tore _ located at 32 Fourth Street, subect to the Conditions of Site Design Review, as �� amended by: Design Committee, M , PETALUMA CITY.PLANNING COMMISSION MTNU`TES':; JULY 6, 1977 Agenda Item #2 Qantas. Development-- - Corporation;,: Sit,'e: Design Res. "\ 5,480, approving: the revision to. adopted: floor and elevation planys''to'r"Pa`rk 'Place' Subd rlsion: 'Phase I' . on N'. MtD7dV &11 "Blvd south of and 'ad'jacent to C andlewood .Mobile Home Park_, MARGARET WINKLER Mr.' Ha11 exp` tamed .the. regz�est; °of'Magaet W.nlcler, FOR ELMER 'FISK- ryepre9.ent1­n.g - Elmer` Fisk, :cons!dsT an,'appl eati.on_ _ E,.T.Q. 'EVALUATION/ to "re7-ori'e� "thj�ee�rlots loca.ted:a't:58.7 La Ile Street REZONING: from - C. - 'C . H;2' High y; Comm re:ial T.he s�'�urren� ;l y., imprmx�ed frith a single;-st`ory structure that has been used as an administrative of- fice for' a termite`ontrol °:business° The Public Hearing wa-s opened t& "6' onsi.der - 'the' 'Env=i nmental Impaot". Question: naive. Ms', Helen Peter =s; exp e'esseci ..:ctan'eern''about her .grape ty:.taxes f _.the - property is zoned commercial and 't:'ha. - t`mo`re.;tra:fi- icy. :zaould be., area. Mr. Hall explained that 'pvesen:t.iy, the" "pr°operty� is: zo;1redf.for iiid'ust —x a -1 use and with the proposed zoning change ,ther-e- would- be less __1htens v:e use. There should not be any direct eff ac- t`°orr 'axes. The Public Hearing was' c1lo.sed, Comm, Daly moved to direct the Planning Director to prepare arid' pos 'a Negative Declaration for the project. The motion was seconded by Comm, Horciza. AYES 5 NO-ES : - 0 ABSENT 1 The Public Hearing was opened to consider the proposed C -H (Highway Commercial) rezoning® No comments were offered from the audience and the Public Hearing was closed, Comm. Horciza, =ved to recommend approval :of 7 the requested C-H,, Highway Com- mercial, rezoning to the City Council with .the specific findings as stated in Exhibit A. The motion was seconded Head, AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 LA FRANCHI, MICKELSEN Mr. .Hall exp-la:ined -::the request of LaFranch,. & HIRSHFIELD / and Hirshfie'l.d''for a variance to allow for a` °five -foot DESIGN: rear yard setback consideration for a site design, review of ai'pr'oposed professional office building: to be located­at ° °Ke' ler Street. The site is being used as, ; a parking lot and %s`' sur­round'ed by the Sierra National Bank-and single— family residences. The 39 -foot °high building covers of the rectangular shaped lot.. 'The' covered front entrance of the building:pro- jects several feet into the required feet; and the rear of. the building pro'= jects approximately 15 =feet into the"required 20' -foot rear yard. 'The.applcant is requesting ,a 5 -foot rear yard variance for a distance of 68-feet along Hill Opera Alley in lieu of the required 20- feet., -2- PETALUMA CITY - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES-. 1977 LA FRANCHI, MICKELSEN The Public` Hear1ng° opened. 'to consider the & HIRSHFIELD %SITE request.' Matt:'Hudson, a: member of =: the` firm of: LaFranchi, DESIGN Midkelsen , and* , '=Hirishfield ; stated the - matter first:. came (Continued)' to.the attefition the City-in 197 an application` for rezoning - wa - s - filed - and at that the entire .build- ing plans - were submitted . for review, _ that' time. the staff indicated that any. variances -- requ �od - would be - a matter of _course, _ which at thisr time is not true, Comm Head asked`at' that time the plans showed_ the design of the buildings and .the d'imension's: of° the-buildings--were mentioned. Dick Lieb, architect, stated they Tlginal building plans -marked Exhibit -A, now show very little change. Mr'. Hirdson''•stated the key - to - the design of the build- ing was so that it would he compatible with the surrounding:neighborhood.- The' main purpose tonight is to discuss ' thee -5`foot - rear yard,.set.back the - boundary line of: Hill Opera Alley Comm, Head- ques'tioned wily .thesEr'conditions did: not. come about at the time of the rezon1ng!-. _ Hudson - the problems - were present, but the issue of design: h9&' handled .after the property' was pur- chased. The design requirements as - `as "the physical layout made the var- iances necessary. Comm. Wright questioned how a building-could designed that violates the Zoning Ord nance and: requires . three - variance - requests:,. Mr. Hudson stated if all three vari'antes - were is:olated, of' variances would cause . a major problem. Mr•,' Liejb° - commented the - major hurdle was yard setback. The requirement of'a - '20 'foot rear setback - is - a waste of - land,in- the -City: In the past, . this type: of�:vari-ance was an easy variance to proved. The staff in the rezoning process - 1ndica.ted their approval of the:- build- :ing. Mr. Hall indicated, that the " yard could of be used for.:.circulation • or as a parking area. Under normal conditions, 30 parking spaces would be re- quired _for this amount of square %e,. -- whereas 20 spaces are proposed. Mr. Hudson quoted Section 26- 303ot the Zoning Or .dinance - Conditions.Necessary for a variance. He recalled several.:lo.cal bu which had been permitted rear and front yard setbacks. He indira.ted'ther`e were topographic - conditions due to 'the alley and grade slope'. The ::structure is attractively designed and meets the intent of the`Zoning.Ordnanc:e:. Lieb commented that the rear yard slope could not, in fact, be'called­a: slope.' Mr, Hall stated the cars could conflict with traffic' from : the•- Sierra Bank, Mr. Hudson stated: alley and hill slope have been there far: many years; None. of the adjoining." structures are being affected by the - design - 6f the building -: Mr. Lieb - indicated that the height: of the overall stui�cture- measured fro - d center is 38-feet.at the tower. The structure does not distract sunlight from home -. Comm. Daly questioned the zoning requ1­rements� for a - rear yard setback Mr_.__Hall read Section 2 -306.3 o -f the Zoning `Ordinance-as follows: - "The 'depth of-a' rear yard of any such lot shall - be " {10) ='or taen (20) percent',of• the, depth of - the lot, whichever is, greater, prrrv1ded- - that - a rear ya•.shall'not to exceed the standard depth for° tht - d s't in' which' it "is' located.," -- Comm- . - Daly stated he was more concerned�with the 2.O�foot� setback in the front- property and not with rear yard setback from the alley, Mr. Lieb explained that the a'lle'y could serve the purpose • o-f` - op en° spac;e•, air and' sung ' Frank Gray stated the original design;;-.sketches a three story plan and'_-con. cern was expressed that air and open space-be.`..preserved to the surrounding-.build- ings. A rear yard setback is required::- -:This is a commercial zone which abuts against a residential 'zone. In this case there is a unique condition which is the alley® Is it.practical or is it_Jegal? -3- PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION M INUT.ES:; JULY.6,. LA FRANCHI.,, MICKELSEN Jim Webb, ­323 - - Howard Street, spoke in favor of - .the_.pro- & HIRSHFIELD /SITE posed plans, - -stat ng this.. is - a good quality design: and DESIGN site use f tz the. property' ; - - This:'. structure- compliments (Continued): other- structu the- area. Fred Schram, Chamber, of Commerce:; stated- the` design plan is - in' keeping with the architec.tute on b:loek The:'reszd6' - of 227'.:Eioward Street stated this is a very appropt ate- °d-e`sign� and`' should:' enhance- neighbor- hood. The owner of the Victorian home located next to the -px°oposed" bu %l ding ' ' indicated this. was a very good plan and would be an asset to the whole neighbor- hood. The Public Hearing was closed Comm. Popp stated the � idea behind planning - .s the` fact we tr "y" toy work :out. the highest and best use of the land: - The alley's° were abandoned : - in the - , olden - - 'days and divided up amongst the abut ,t;ing properties, - 'Alleys were• used - by horse and buggies for garbage , pickups and this - :,the reason why "they are' so narrow.:..We should , practical and use the land to7.'i-ts highest` - and` best'.usee There' is a need and. by the design of the building -they°:a're. supplying - tle- need - for - the area. Comm.. Horciza stated the requirement­o.f - the setback` is being.met' here, The: :: ". reason for rear yard setbacks` is' or' parking and the; rear yard ° in this: aspect' is 'tieing used. This building = will° not "with the - visibility- of across the street and light to other -bu ldings-,, If this variance," is: approved .we' will be acting in the spirit of the- or"d nanc�e- - Mr:; Hall •,s.ta.ted. are,. now parking• at this site and possibly" are:" bank patrons or shoppers`us ng:the space„ Mt. Gray indicated this could, be-,a -, problem:.. - Parking - on` this site, has;;been..sur- veyed undet° the Redevelopment P-rog•ram e,' '.Thes commuters °and people ;that - wor'k downtown. We are now working on the - 'expansion.' of ., two:` major pails ng;. lots for the • downtown area and possibly a doubl'zdecker par:king' ty. Comm. -Head moved' to grant the Variance' to allow for a five foot rear.yat -d set back for a proposed pro fessional office building, The motion was seconded by Comm. Popp AYES 5 "NOES .. 0" ABSENT` 1 It was the general consensus that Site Design- Review considerations-for the project would be continued along'with..a- :variance request for front yard lot coverage. ANDREW MICELI- E.I,Q. Mr, Hall` ned° th'e request,"of EVALUATION /TENTATIVE mod ification -to to allow for SUBDIVISION MAP: a lot 'width bf 58 feet and; - a request' for a- Tentative Subd "approval for a two' lost subdivision: The applicant originally divined his lot' into four 'lots and is not requesting'a division'af' one of the f our, 10ts into lots of property located on Ely' Eivd :,_-S:ou.th•a The property is 157 feet:. and 116 feet deep on one side and l — :f -;eet" deep on "the: other' `.. The ap- plicant proposes I to divide this :lot ­intro: two `lots with -- the' smaller lot being 58 -feet by 116 feet, The siting of the existing residence makes .it mpo,s- Bible . "to provide more than 58 -feet of width for -Lot 2 without encroaching -4- P,ETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES; aJULY "'6, - .1977' - - ANDREW ":MICELI- E.I.Q, on the required- .si:deyard setback. - The subject lot is EVALUATION /TENTATIVE over 18 ,",000'•aqua.re feet in'area and approximately 157 SUBDIVISION MAP feet Wide•,". existing on lot (Continued): makes it inipbssible.:to divide the.lot two lots having' minmum' - of 6 applicant is, therefore requesting a.modifica:tion to the Subdivision Ordinance to• a low - fo-r• - one - lot - being only_: 58: feet.. :wide. f The Public Hearing was opened ; to - - consider - - the. Environmental Impact Questionnaire. Mr. Miceli indicated he would like to split the lot. Drainage.has been installed for the property and adj oining proper=t -y'. The Public Hearing closed_n . Comm. Head moved to direct the Planning Director to prepare and post a Negative Declaration for the project, The was seconded by Comm. Popp AYES 5 NOES 0" ABSENT l' - Comm. Horciza moved to recommend approval for.a,mod ification to the Subdivision Ordinance with specific findings for the project. The motion was seconded by z Comm. 'Head. AYES 5 NOES.. 0 ABS'EN'T 1 Comm. 'Daly moved to recommend approval...of` the Tent'ativ'e' Map- for the Miceli Sub'- division to the City Council, with conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning staff and City'Engineei The-motion was'senonded by Comm, Horciza, AYES 5 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 p - �removed from ,TONAS �SOUSA- Mr. Hall. ex la�n:ed`� - that this ite m would be. MODIFIED SUBDIVISION the agenda.....The...applicant understands that has.--t.0 ALLOCATION: go through ratmal allocation procedures - and all the j documentation, and elevations would.have to be sub= j mitted before'.considerati.on could be made by the Com- mission. Comm. Daly °"thank'ed; - the Commission for' the privi.l:ege - -of worsting with them . Comm,, Popp expressed_ appreeation that Comm : 'had previously served on" the Commission and had returned to again with Comm ss1on. Comm, Horci' a:�:�said' i.'t' had been enlightening - working with Comm. Popp, - 'Mr,,.- Hail recommended Comm, Popp be made an honorary member-of the Commission and historian, ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p,m, Chairman Attest:.