Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes 01/25/1972
A G E N - D A PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION .-JANUARY 25, 1972 ADJOURNED MEETING 7:3�O P,M, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL: Comm. Balshaw Cerini Daly Schmelz Waters STAFF: William C. McGivern, Director of Planning Richard D. A. Anderson, Assistant Planner AMENDMENT TO Public Hearing to consider amending Zoning ZONING ORDINANCE Ordinance 662.N.C.S. to incorporate a Planned 662 NX.S. Community District and a Unit Develop- Res. 2-72 merit District. ADJOURNMENT r] �i CITY' OF° PETALUMA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 25, 1972 , Adjourned meeting of the Petaluma Cty'P.larining Commission was held on January- 25, 1972 at 7:30 p.,m.. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Petaluma, California.. PRESENT: Comm.. Bal shaw, Cerini, Daly, 8chme1z, Water,, ABSENT: None STAFF: William Ci McGivern, Director of Planning MINUTES FOR A I8, 1,972 J 1 972, JANUARY 12, 197 JANUARY 14, 19'72AND The minutes for the meeting of January 11,.1972,were approved subject - to the following correction made to P AGE ONE: "Regular meeting was corrected to•read "Special" meeting. The minutes for the meeting of January 12, 1972 were approved subject to the following corrections: Commissioner Cerin% seconded b_. Commis was made by PAGE 5 - PARAGRAPH 3 should read "Moti y ssioner - Batshaw to retain the la a's Presentty zoned industriaZa PAGE 7 - PARGRAPH 2, LINE 2 should read. "bounded by the greenbeZt, there wo "uld' be' no need for the" etc. The minutes for the - medt -inq of January 14:,.-1972 were approved as submitted. The minutes for the mee:t.;ng. of January 1 -, 197.2 were approved . subject to the following correction on PAGE 1: AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE NO,. 6:62 N.C.S. RESOLUTION-2 - PARAGRAPH 2', LINE 9, should read "State legis ati.on.,and ask the City'Attorney to submit an interpretation'" etc. PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO ZONINGORDTNANCE NUMBER 6.6 N.C.S. Chairman Waters opened the public hearing to consider,,amending ?oning'Ordinance Number 662 N .C.S. to incorporate a Planned Unit Development and a Planned Community District. The Commission decided to study and consider the Planned Unit Development District and the Planned Community District separately, paragraph by paragr.aph., Comm. Waters. proceeded to-read the 8 -page Planned. Unit Development Distri,ct. -2. January 25, 1972 PUBLIC HEARING -.AMENPME ZONING ORDINANCE NUMBER 662 N.C.S. The Commission determined that,SECTION 8 -100, PURPOSE, LINE 3 stating: "woule.d not normally be permitted," does.not mean "does not prohibit". SECTION 8-20:0 the Commission determined that a "Development Plan" was the applicant's.plan and not the Environmental Design Plan. SECTION 8-.202 was changed to read, as follows,- 8202. A. residantia4 planned development is defined as: 2, A . r e's d ent aZ davetapmont, for which a subdivi- sion map has been filed, that conveys in fee an individual separate tot (Note: The balance of the sentence was deleted from Item 41 and made part of Item #2.) 2. A residenti,at development for which a subdivi- si:an has been filled, tkat a6nveys -in fee an individual separate tot and an undivided interezt: to any common Lot which' owned jointly by t-he owners of individual -lots 3© A rezidenti-a,l development., for which a subdivi- sion map has been filed, that conveys the con- dominilum estate defined im -Section 783 of the California Civil Code, or 4. A residential development, for which a subd,ivi- sion map 'has been .fite'd, that conveys a commun- ity interest as defined in Section, 1,1004 of the California Busi and Professions Code. Comm. Baishaw-requested copies of the 72 book of "Urban Lands 'Institu;te". on Planned Unit'Oevelopment be acquireU. SECTION 8-2- LINE The Commission wanted it understood that "proposal be submitted" by the applicant or initi- ated by the Planning Commission. Mr. Robert Laq&l from the floor- inquired who would interpret who is PROFESSIONAL? Mt. McGivern stated it was outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance and also the-,State Business.and Professions, Code, SECTION 8-203.7 The Commission recommended that a tree preser- vation p1an'be added to preserve existing trees.. The Section should read "A proj'es' prepared Za:n-ds,caping,.. tree. pZ - t,ng_, and tree preservation plan-, -3- January 25, 1972 PUBLIC HEARING AMENDMENT TO Z ONING O RDINANCE NUMBER 662 N.C.S. SECTION 8 - 203.8, TOP OF PAGE 4 The. Commissrion recommended the following two sentences: be removed: "The 'number of dwelling units in one building shall be limited to two (2) in the R -1 (.One Family Residential) District, eight (8) in the R -2 (Two Family Residential) district. There shall be no limit to the number of units in 'a build in other'2ones." The following.sentence ±should be changed to read "The minimum number of dine t tiny un to in any Planned Uni Deve Zopment should be . twenty (20) . " SECTION 8 -204 Commmmissoner Daly pointed out that the applicant could appeal to the City Council should the Planning Commi.ssfon reject, the Plan. SECTION 8 -2 The Commission felt the City 'Council shoud deter- mne:the fees for filing. SECTION 8 - 206 The four structures referred. to in this section are models, under the present Model Homes Provision of .the Sub - division Ordinance They are to be used as sales offices and models. Mr. Robeft Lagel commented from the floor that if the units are to be rented, there would not be a final map filed, hence the first sentence of SECTION 8 -206 was modified to read "There shall be a subdivizion map recorded where applicable, pursuant... ©" The Commission recommended than the words "or rented" be inserted dto read: "The:se struotu'.Wes shall not be or rented, until the final .map " " Th .e ' s to prohibit the owners from renting the models. SECTION, 8-207 The.Commis recommended that. the first sen- tence be modified to .read:: if nter'ior streets of a prcJea•t s hall be improved in accordance wi th City s4bdioi -s .on street standards Delete "including concrete curbs and gutters,.." This is included in the City Standards. John Anderson of Mc -Kay & Somps Engineers wanted_cla.rif`ication on that portion of paragraph refering to: Whatthe public and pri- vate streets, ;shall be certified tog Much _Iis.cuss,ion followed. The Commission recommended that Section 0.207, Sen- tence.3 shall read: "'111 impra,vem.ents of public. and .pr :ate straeet.a shall be certified as rnegting' standards noted on th-� plans as prepared by a registere civil engineer prior to 'fznaZ 'inspection and o6cu' pancy.ff SECTION 8 -Z08 The Commission recommended that the City Attorney h° revs eau t s section. 4 ;� -4- January 25, 1972 SECTION 8 Comm. Balshawcommented that the City Engineer should be sure, to look at the total proposed development on a street so that the, street can F c all the traffic. it - - - was suggested by the Commission that the:problem,be brought up, during the entire review. SECTION 00 Th ' e Commission reco�ern ' ded th'a ' the title of "Zoning Admifti-str'dtor"'be changed e'ad."'Planning Director". SECTION 8-100 The Commission recommended that a ver y . strong penalty clause be installed by the'iCi Council. The public hearing was adjburned.t8 the ''next.regular meeting of the Planning Commiasion' Tuesday,:' 1, 1972.- Chairman ATTEST: Secteta-ty W