The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Minutes 09/15/19700 A G E N ID A PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING #5, FISCAL YEAR 7:30 O'CLOCK P.M•, CITY HALL 0. SEPTEMBER 15, 1970 COUNCIL CHAMBERS PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL: Comm. Brunner Wate,rs STAFF: William C. McGivern Director of Planning Andy Anderson, Ass Director. CORRESPONDENCE AMENDMENT TO Public hearinq to consider amending Zoning ZONING ORDINANCE Ordinance 662,N.C.,S. regarding regulation RES. 22-70 of fences. CAMBRIDGE SQUARE Request fi' led jbMacKay & Somps for a time TENTATIVE MAP extension on the approval of the tentative RES. 23-70 map for Cambridge Square Subdivision, to be located.on South McDowell.Boulevard. C & S ENTERPRISES Continuation of public hearing to consider ap- REZONING p . lication tiled by.0 & S Enterprises .to rezone Z12-70 833.Petaluma.BoUli6vard.Nortn' (A.P. Nos. 6-041-04 and a portion l of.6--7041-2 : 7) from a.C-S (Service Commercial) .Zone to .an R-M-1500 (Multi-Family) Zone. SUN TERRACE- PARK Tentative map �approval .for Sun .Terrace Park PLANNED UNIT DEV., Planned Unit Development submitted by Sunco De- TENT, SUBD. MAP velopment Corporation.. A proposed l'00 unit RES. cluster develd pment. to. be.,located at the .inter - section of El Blvd. North & East Washington St. ADJOURNMENT r September MI5, 19 70' I Regular meeting of the Petaluma Ci tyj P l ' a , n n i'ng Commission was h e l d on September' 15, 1970; at 7:30 o'clock in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Peta I uma,,, Ca l i f'orn i a. PRESENT: Comm. Brunner, *Koen`i Hood, Waters, Stanley. *Comm. Koenitzer substituted for Comm. Perry. ABSENT: (None. STAFF: William C: McGivern, Director of Planning. Andy Anderson Assistant ' P llann i ng Director. .. i CORRESPONDENCE . Bode;ga Avenue - Petaluma- VaIIey� Ford . Road Name .Change Request Mr. McGivern read a letter rece' from Mayor Helen Putnam in answer to a request from the Planning Commission (made at their meeting on September 1, 1970) to have the Mayor appoint a committee to study the name change proposal, for Bodega Avenue - Petaluma- Valley Ford. Road (a Sonoma County Referral). Mayor Putnam was of the opinion it is a Planning Commission matter and recommended the Commission make,an in -depth study in - conjunction with the Sonoma County Planning!Commission and citize'ns'residing in the area in question, and make a recommendation ° - to the City Council. Following a lengthy it was the general feeling of the Commission, unless the County has some good reasons for the name change, they were not receptive to the name change proposal. A motion to forward a recommendaation to the Sonoma County Planning Commission reflecti'ng"t1his.feeling, was introduced by Comm. Brunner, seconded by Comm'I. Waters, and passed by the following vote: Ayes: Brunner, Hood, Waters, Stanley. Noes: Koenitzer. Comm. Koenitzer felt the matter should be looked into in more depth. CAMBRIDGE 'SQUARE TENTATIVE MAP RES. 23 -70: ' The Commission considered a request filed by MacKay & Somps for a time extension on the approval of, the tentative map for Cambridge Square Su.b•divi to be located on_South McDowe Boulevard Kr Ron Simpkins was present on behalf of the developers. Mr. McGivern stated the request was in order. Res. 23-70 granting one year's extension, of time within which to file the final map for Cambridge Square, was Introduced by Comm. Koenit`zer, seconded by Comm. Waters, and passed unanimousl P' AG E = I SUN T.ERA,CE:,.PARK PLANNED 'UNd T � DEV, TENT. SUED. MAP RES. 17 -70 A I etter wasi received from Mr. Frank LaPointe request -i ng. ghat the tentative map approval for Sun TerracePar:k Planned Unit Development sub - mitted by SuInco Development, be held over until Octo::ber'6, 1970; to allow more time to present aldditi'onal data regarding the sub- di A motion, to consider the matter on October 6, 1' was introduced by Comm, Hood, seconded by ;Comm. Koenitzer and passed by .all members present. ZONING ORDINANCE Chairman Stanley opened'the public hearing to AMENDMENT RE: consider amending the Zoning Ordinance re- FENCES Re.s. 22 -70 garding re,gu�lation of fences. Mr. McGivern presented an; exhibit show1ing the setback requ i rementsl 'for fences on a typical block. He stated the enforcement problem regarding setback requirements started approximately 4'years ago ;when the subdivision boom started. The primary ,problem concerns reverse corner lots. In orlde r to utili these lots to their fullest extent, fences are being constructed which encroach into the sideyard area. This in turn, causes a safety problem due to obscurred vision of pelrsons backing out of driveways on key } i ots . Mir. McGivern f urth.er stated the proposed would be. 'consistent with F.H'.A. requirements. At this point Mr. Anderson, Assistant Planning Director, read the proposediamendment. The Planning Director..; noted the recently adopted fence permit procedure would enable proper enforcement of the proposed °fence regulations. Testimony was presented from the following people: Mr. George L 516 Albert Way; Mr. M.B. Kristiainsen, 1709 St. Anne Way; Mr. Hak Hansen,,, 708 Keokuk Street; C.F. Hilgeford, 735 Paula Laine; Mr. David Traversi, Attorney; Mr. Ron S i'mpik i ns, MacKay & Somps, Ci v i I Engineers. In general, most of their testimony related to existing fence violations or probl' em Chairman Stanley informed the audience the „matter before the Commission was to adopt an ordinance that would el,i,minate s i m i l a r prob'LI ems in the future.. M.r,. LaMontanya r'e.comm.ended that both the corner lots and reverse corner lots, have the same setback requirements. Mr. McGivern replied this requirement would necessitate larger corner lots. This requirement would not be feasible at this time due to the tentative and final maps of record which do not reflect the recommended increase in lot size for corner lots. Mr. Hilgeford was of the opinion restrictions should only be imposed on those fences which create a safety hazard. PAGE 2 Z0N I NG ORDINANCE AMENDMENT `RE:: FENCES 'Cont`inued) ' y Mr. Travers' sugge.s'ted, that' the fence ordinance incorporate a provision for a variance procedure. After further di`scu'ssion a motion, to continue the matter unti the next meeting, to allow the staff to revise ,the o.rd'ina.nce to'- reflect a v°ari &nce `p:rocedure was. introduced by Comm. Koenitzer, seconded by Comm. Waters, and passed unanimously. 1 _ C` & S ENTERPRISES Cont i nu:at loi 6f `'the, pub 1 1 c hearing to consider the REZONING.,Z12 -70 application file }d by C & S Enterprises to rezone 833 Pe`ta i uma B v�d North C8. P. Nos. 6-041-04 & a portion of 6 -04 BI -27) w ;a:s h,e.ld at this time. The ap'`p I i cants request a change of zone from C -S (S,ervVice Gommercial) to R -M' -1500 (Multi - FamiI Res i dent`i a I . A resu-me of the st'af f report was presented' by Mr. Anderson. th.e staff recommended approval .o.f the �R -M -1 zon'.ing :except for the long, narrow P6'f olf the subject parcel fronting on .Petal uma Bogi.evard, In order to protect the. continuity of the commercial zone along PetafL:uma Boulevard, the staff recommended this port* remai.n.in th,e C -S .Z-oning District. Mr. McGivern read a ; petition signed by 10 owners of property and improvements in the Petaluma Boulevard- Magnolia Avenue- Cherry & Keokuk Streets area protes?ti the rezoning. Mr. Victor DeCarl i stated t`he proposed rezoning would be against the objectives of the Zoning Or H nace. Furthermore, an apartment complex would increase the traffic haz;ard., flooding problem, and an increased tax burden to the people of Petalu-ma. Mr. DeCarl i further noted the app:I, i cants were aware of the C -S z..o.n of the parcel when they purchased it a.nd the property'should ba developed as such. Further testimony in ,opposi'ti,on to the rezoning was heard from ,Mr. Delmo Cuppoletti, Mr.. Francis Laz i a and Mrs. Gar° l sen, representing ` Lasher Hatchery. Mr. McGivern read a letter from Mr. S. Forman expressing concern, over the effect the deve lopment would have regarding access to h.is property., (Mr. 'Forman's property is contiguous to the proposed devel opment). I PAGE E 3 • C 8. S Mr. Travers i Attorne; re 'rese:nt i n, the deve -I Y P g. REZONING Qper.s, in- troduce.4 Mr.. Robert Severin; oane (Continued') of tfh°e owners of the property. Mr Se- ver'in re,v'i e,wed the ov.er�a l I development plans for the s[te. and e "mpb!,asiz-ed their need to. in- corp.oratelthe ,portion fron:tV on Petaluma Bou:lev'a,rdlin t.he'ir rezoning r.eq:.uest; °,namel the•area is to provide for parking and open space. Mr. Severin also stated . they would cooperate with the Sonoma County 'Water Agency wi th regard to the f l o o d i n g p ro b I e'.m .. Mr. Traversi addressed Commission and made the following comments: the rezoning would provide a convenient buffer between commercial uses and s`mgle family residen- tial deve')opment; there is a definite need for apartment units in .Petaluma; the complex would be geared toward older people, or smal sized famil,ie:s, and would not create an additional burden to, schools; the narrow frontage of the property makes it unfeasible for commercial devel pme:nt; the proposed 'deve;lopment will be completely fenced; if d'eve l o.ped commercially, the property would cre?ate more traffic than th:e apart- ment comp #1 ex; th;e p ropos'a I would provide revenue for the city ;, the developers do not have an o'bi l igation to provide access • to another person's proper Mr. J a:ck Garrison also spoke in favor of the relon i ng,� vorci ng m=any of Mr. Travers i s comments. Mr. McG_ivern reminded the Commission of the importance of protecting .the continuity of the zoning b.oundari'es. A rezon n'g of 'the front portion R -.M- 1 500 would constitute spot zoning because C -S zoning would 'be on both sides of the parcel. Fo.L I ow i ngl further d i scu°ss i on, Chairman Stanley c'lo'sed the public :hearing. Res Z12-70, rezon i 'ng the entire area from C -`S to R: °M 1500 as r by th.e applicantls, was introduced by Comm. Wat -ers, seconded Jby Comm. Br°unne;r 'and passed . unan i mous,l y . PAGE 4 � ~ ` / / The r� be nQ no fur+her �paina� � to come bofor� f � e Cbmmis�|oh, tho meeting was od'ourh. � | | Affesf: AGE 5 ^ ^ , ' ,