Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 11/21/1972A G E N D PETALUMA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 14OVEMBER 21, 1972 REGULAR MEETING :7:39 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY BALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG ROLL CALL: Comm. Balshaz7 Bond Daly Hood Kopp Schme Waters STAFF: William C.'McCivern, Director of Community Richard, A. Anders Assistant Planner CORRESPONDENCE CARO RIGNEY - Use permi 'Witli respect 'to *property at 1799 East USE PERMIT; Padison Street for the purpose of a home occupa- tion for teaching ceramics, clan -se s to be four persons meeting three nights a week. REVIEW OF USE Review of the fol.lowincr Use Permits as to their PERMITS U26 - 69, com�l anco - with the 'zoning ordinance: U21 -55, & U31 -71: � U26-60 Al Stack U21 -55 - C & W Auto, Wrecking U31 -71 - Geo. Dart Hide Company REVIEW OF Qantas Developme Z16 - - PCD Rezoning of ENVIRONMENTAL pro ertV on the s'outhoasterly side of the ASSESSMENT Washington Sgu?te Shopping Center and McDowell STATEMENTS: Park, extending easterly along Washington Creek to McGregor Avenue Foodmaker, Inc. 213-72 - Proposed commercial eve opme of .lac T the - Box to be located at 833, 837, & r,41 East washington. ADJOURNMENT M I N U T E S CI; PETALUMA CITY PLANNING 'COMMISSION NOVEMBER 21, 1972 REGULAR MEETING 7:3 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAAIBEPS, CITY' HALL PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA PPE'SENT: Comm. ,Bals'haw, Bond, Daly, Hood, Popp?, .Schmelz, Waters ABSENT: None STAFF: T 9illiam C.. MdGivern, Community D6e ,telopm.ent Director Richard D. A. Anderson, As si stant P lanner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The : minutes n£ N vem � o�aer 7 , ' 197 2 ��ere `a�proved With the-following change, Page 2, regarding Petaluma Properties: ne,zoning, Comm. Balshaw suggested that a Tra:ff°i:c Study be reviewed by the City Engineering staff, not suEmitted by them. The minutes of No vember 14, 1972 were" .approved as su CORRESPONDENCE: Mr. McGi' ern read a letter dated November 20 1.972 from the office of Loun bos & Louunibos reque5ting continuance of their hearing to December 5,. 1,972 to enable them time to prepare an Environmental. Impact report in support of the rezoning app`licat -ion® CAROL RIGNEY - Mr Anderson read the staff report recommending USE PERMIT: approval of the use pe rmit for the purpose of a home occupation of teaching ceramics in Mrs. Pigney °s' home and listed the conditions applying thereto. Chairman Popp asked if anyone from the audience objected to this use permit and no objec- tic n WAS g1ven. Carol Rigney stated that she had complied. With the condition that her fire extin- guishe he recharged and it had been certified by the 'Fire Department. The question of parking was raised and the applicant was advised that any future violation of the parking conditions could result in review o1f the u'-se permit Comm. Daly made the motion that the use permit be approved with conditions as cited and Comm. Balshaw seconded the motion. AYES 7 NOES 0 REVIEW OF USE Mr. McGivern read a report submitted by the Chief PERMITS U26 - 60, Building inspect,or which indicated the following: U21 -55, & U31 -71: November 21, 1972, 1 Al Stack Auto 'Wreck r - es - The entire, yard was enclosed by fence, and stree , t side was clean. Some parts were stacked on the roof. Pence was in good repair. truck and used eq i quip- ment parked 'to north side, outside of fence - ownershin unknown,. 2. Rarta Hide.- The area eras relatively clean. .The Lakeville Street side was-screened by 1- I di ' ng and fence:.­ Further cleaning will be; done when building, is completed. 3. C & T.^7 Pg.,u Wreckers - Yence and building enclose the wrecking and storage area., Some car.-, were •parked across Lakeville Street on the corner of Lindberg Lane (most vehicles were of 1972 registry,'). Accompanying snapshots 'showing existing conditions w er e . I. pre;ented to the Planning Commissioners. (USE PERMIT U26 Comm., Waters b rought out the fact that upon review of the use permit for PU Stack Auto Wrecking on Auqust 15, 1972 the app had informed the Planning Coranission that he intended to expand his business and that all conditions of the use permit would be met in 90 days and a plan of expansion submitted, and he.wished.to know whir this had not been dohe. Chairman Popp called upon Mr. Stack to expla,iP. Mr..Stack remarked 'that at the time of the commis;sion's last review he had thought 90 day s would be sufficient; however, due to rain and 4 Q injuries to two of h.s men.he had simnIv run out oftl,me%in aCCOMplishing the cleanup intended. T.,,7 , ith regard to� expansion,, he stated this was out of the question economically., and the owner of the additional land"he.had leased was trying to sell this :n ropprty and he was noN. on a month-to- month has-is on 'that property. Mr. Stack also informed the PlLanti'nq Commission that numerous cars were abandoned that did not bear identifica- tio - n, and this placed.an additional burden on him to dis'pose of' and complicated the cleanup process. Mr. Stack answered, various questions by stating that all trucks parked in the adjacent lot were his and that no parking facilities were available for his property'. Chairman Popp asked if he could complete the cleanup with more time and Mr. Stack, informed him that he cou-Id and that the material. -2- ,5ovember 21, 11972 on the, roof 'of his building could be cleaned of , tomorrow. lie also '. indicated that an alternative to solve his parking and vehicle s ' torage - problem was to park his vehicles on the street like other companies in the City were doing. He added that a company across the street from him had been operatinq for two gears za a use permit and wanted to knolror why he had to comply and they did tot. Chairman Popp informed him the matter would be looked. into within the next 30 days. Mr. 14cGivern was asked what proceedings . be taken in revoking the use permit and if Mr. Stack's use per-mit ti•, valid. He ansti--rered that first it would have to he it that Mr. Stack was in violation of the, use permit, then the City staff wotllel be authorized to initiate proceedings for abatement within certain time and it would then be turned over to the City Attorney for action. It was felt the use T )ermit was valid and that the biggest violation was in the trucks being parked outside of the area that the use permit allowed, And - the building should be made more feasibly attractive. Mt. McC.i agreed that :there were unident.i-fial-1e cars abandoned vxThich posed a problem and suggested that Mr. Stack be allowed an addi- tional '30 days - to remove the automobiles on the proper, - ty adjacent to his site. Comm. Daly asked if the City Council would have to take act'.ion in revoking the use permit,and was told they would not, that the-effective date would be when the use permit was revoked b4 the Commission, ,although Mr. 4 Stacy:., could appeal it to the City Council.. Comm. T%7ate'r5 expressed his fee1,inqs that ap roximately p two years ago the same violations occurred and had been cleaned up and now the same situation existed, and expressed concern about the assurance that the l p ap I icant would I,ive uT. �) to conditions in the futdre. H& also remarked th-at this street was one 'of th-e main entrances to the City and he did not fe this the of violation should 1:)e allowed. Chairman Popp queried Mr. Stack as to his inten- tions and Mr. Stack told him he would do his best in the next 30 days but it would depend on the .rainy season. He added it would take a year for him to remove all his cars and clean up the lot if. his Use permit was revoked. -3- III November 21, 1972 Comm,. Balshaw made the motion that if in 30 days: the property north of the wrecking yard is riot cleared an(9 the. remainder of the yard ,.is not in specific con ' formance with the use per mit, that it should be revoked. Comm. Tlaters seconded the motion. AYES S . NOES 2 Chairman, Popp wished to clarify that he had voted "NO" because he felt tine ap . plicant had tried 'to correct the situation and that the 30-day extension should be granted -without the threat of revoking his use permit. (USE PERMIT U21 Tvir. Louis Worden from C & V, Auto Wreckers took the floor and stated that he did not have cars : parked across the street. lie ex-plained that some of the cars beloncied to residents on Lindberg L.a,ne,, others be,longed to employees of Basta Hide and customers of C & W, and sometimes C & 1 parked their truck there.. 1 Worden stated he ,had called the Police Department a number of regarding abandoned cars., five of which had occurred in the last month. He also stated he realized that his fence was not tip to the full height as required by the use periAt, but 'Ehat he had gotten the galvanized tin to finish the feride and it should be accomplished within a f-ew weeks., Comm. Bond asked Mr. McGivern if he agreed that the only violation was the fence height and Mr. McGi answered that ) that was correct, since at this time it could not be ascertained whose vehicles were across the street., Comm. Pna made, the motion that theilse permit should be revoke(',' v7ithi,n 30 days unless the fence is in compliance i,�iith the City ordinance. Comm. Waters seconded the motion. AYES 6 NOES 1 Chairman Por)p clarified that he voted "NO" as he felt the owner has tried and the extension should not be on the basis of possible revocation- Comm. Schmelz wished to clarify his "YES" by stating that this street was the gateway to Petaluma and this type of thing was detriment°al to the esthetics of. the community. (USE PEP14IT U31-71) Mr. McGivern informed the Comm- ssion that Basta F.Je- was putting up the required structure as required by his new use permit and still had another 90 days, allowed to completes. Comm. B'alsha * w inquired as to the control of the odors from this building and was told that thie new -4— November 21, 11932 • building. should improve the condition and that odors should not be eminating off the .site. The Air Poilu Control Agency 'would, monitor this land use.. Since the applicant was comply- ing with his p r action � ,.ermit no furthe was taken. Comm. Bond was excused at this time ENVIRONMENTAL Q4qtas D. eve.lopment': Mr. McGivern informed the ASSESSMENT COP-MisSlOn that an Envil STATEMENT Statement had been furnished by the applicant and REVIEW: that after its revie, and comments by the City Council when the rezon t.-.ias put before them, a letter had been directed. to Qantas asking for I an * EIR on certain areas Comm. Tlate asked if the Environmental Assessment Statement had been reviewed by the Traffic Committee as he felt this i Baas a serious problem and that �1 ash ngton Street cbuld.not handle the additional traffic around 5-: H At this. time 1VIx. Joslyn informed the C tly he had his Environmental Impact Report ready • for presentation, which included a traffic survey prep ared by Murray-McCormick who handled the traffic situation at the.14ashington Square Shopping - Center., This survey had.also been dis- cussed with the Di of Highways. It was the consensus of the study that the Caulfield Lane extension would, divert much of the traf f rom rom Washington Street and the additional streets i n the 'proposed PCD would allow for better . routing. As far as the schools were concerned., he -felt that the $114,0100 in tax revenue at the d1sposal of the schools for their utilization was sufficient. .M r. Joslyn further stated that the burden could be taken off of the school by bussing or his ,previous proposal of modifying one of the proposed units of his apartment complex as a temporary classroom. 1 Joslyn felt that the area adj,acent to McDoWall School would not cause the overcrowding, but that the problem i,�7as really caused by husqing students in who lived a mile or mile and a half away,. Ghairmah•Popp said this problem would be up to the school board. M70 November 21, 1972 Comm. Daly read the recent, Supreme Court decision.regarding the Friends of Mammoth and remarked that in accordance with it, he did not feel that an Environmental Impact Report would.be required on this project. Comm. Waters said that in a sense we have been way ahead of the law on this matter as we have been requiring a report from the builders on the impact their protects might have. Comm. Bals'haw was concerned about commercial uses covering some of the .open space and f - elt this -would result in a density g'j__eater--than -- - the desired 6 units per acre. Mr. McGivern remark ' ed that until the EIR regu- lations were cleaned up we would have to go through the procedures as outlined in the Council's resolution,, and the,City Council needs to know whether this EIR conforms with what the Commiss feels is necessary. Comm. Daly interjected that ton.i,ght. have to decide whether an EIR is necessary. Comm. 1-laters felt that it was wrong for the applicant to submit the traffic study as. he pays to have the study clone and it is slanted towards his view, yet money is not provided - for the City to do this. Comm Daly remarked t the City staff would decide whether the report was factual. Comm. Hood stated he .felt that an EIR was necessary and therefore made.a motion that we accept the EIR, study it, And take Action at the next meeting as to whether it is a proper EIR. Comm. Waters seconded the motion. AYES 4 NOES 2 ABSENT 1 'Mt. Joslyn brought out the fact that he had a letter previously from the City Engineer stating that their project would not overload existing streets and he did not understand why an addi- ti'onal report was required. Ile also brought out the f:adt that the rezoning had been postponed by the Council and was going .to be heard at the .next City Council Meeting . onVovember 27, 1972. - Comm. Daly reaffirmed that the Council said they would review the EIR at the next meeting. Mr. Joslyn did not understand the purpose of going to the City Council at this time. Mr. McGivern told him he could report to the Council on the action of the Planning Commission. He also stated that procedures had to be previously drafted and November 21, 1.972 legislation, established , and that a definite set of procedures were not.yet available when Mr. J`os'lyn.started the proceedings and he therefore got caught in the middle. Comm. Daly remarked that the City Council Meeting could give Qantas the opportunity to come back at the next meeting and appeal the whole process. Foodm "aker, Inc tvlr. T cGivern informed the Planning Coram:ssion that the applicant had sub- mitted a negative Environmental Assessment Statement. Mr. Meyer, Superintendent of Petaluma School District., had responded to the request for evaluation of the EAS stating that consideration should be given to the effect on students as they go to and from the nearby attendance centers of Kenilworth Jr High School and Mcl:inley Elementary School, to additional foot and automobile traffic, to student safety, and to what the poliey will be in working with the schools in regard. to new student problems that may arise. t No reply had yet been received from the City Engineer and Faze Chief. Comm. Daly brought out the fact that in actlzality the City engineer had already given comments on the traffic when the property was rezondd. Mr. McGivern felt that the matter should be continued until the negative statement had been reviewed by the City staff. Comm. Daly felt this project should be considered small bus:iness and theref: :ore no FIR should be necessary.. He therefore made a motion that con - sidering the recent decisions of the Supreme Court, no EIR is necessary. Comm. Schmelz seconded the motion. ?.YES 3 NOES 3 ASSENT 1 Chairman Popp declared the motion lost. Comm. Waters made the motion that as long as we had progressed this far, the matter should be con- tinued until further evaluation is received from the staff_. Comm. Ealshaw seconded the motion inasmuch as it was according to the rules and regulations established. EYES 5 NOES 1 ABSENT 1 -7- November 21 1.972 PETALUMA PROPERTIES Chairman Popp suggested that due to the letter REZONING Z18-72 submitted by Loun ibos and1ounibos asking for a continuance of two weeks, that a motion be made accordingly. Comm, Vlaters made the motion that the hearing be continued at the next regular meeting and Comm. Hood seconded the motion. AYES 6 NOES 0 ABSENT 1 OTHER BUSINESS: Comm. Balshaw expressed his opinion that special meetings to take care of some problems such as junkyards, abandoned cars, the problem referred to by Mr. Stack of a use permit violation, street park ing other should be held.* He also stated he realized staff taff was quite busy and could possibly use additional help. Comm. Waters remarked additional meetings would only put a further harden on the staff and others involved.,, A long discussion followed on possible solutions for time allotment.to take care of pending prob- lems and it was decided to meet at 7:00 p.m. every alternate meeting without the staff to discuss current problems and their solutions. ADJOURNMENT: the meeting adjourned, at 1 p.m. -8-