Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 4.A-Attch4 03/15/2004Draft 'SPARC Minutes February 26, 2004 . City of" Petaluma, CA a 'Site Plan and Architectural - 'Review Committee 185$ 2 3 Draft 4 Minutes 5 EXCERPT 6 Regular Meeting February 26, 2004 7 City Council Chambers 3:00 p.m. 8 City Hall, 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 9 Telephone: 707 - 778 -4301 E -Mail: cdd @ci.petaluma.ca.us 10 FAX: 707- 778 -4498 Web Page: htip :/ /www.ci.petaluma.ca.us 11 12 13 The Site Plan and Architectural, Review Committee encourages applicants or their 14 representatives to be available , at the meeting to answer questions so that no agenda item 15 need be deferred to a later date due to aaack of pertinent information. 16 17 Roll Call: Present: Teresa Barrett, Janet Gracyk, Jack Rittenhouse* 18 Absent: Terry.Kosewic 19 20 *Chairperson 21 22 Staff: Irene Borba, Senior Planner 23 Tiffany Robbe, Associate Planner 24 Anne Windsor, Administrative Secretary 25 26 27 Public hearing began @ 4:40 28 29 30 II1. GATTI /STR•ATFORD PLACE SUBDIVISION, 710 Sonoma Mountain 31 Parkway 32 AP No: 137- 070 -079 33 File: 04 -SPC- 0070 -CR 34 Planner: Tiffany Robbe 35 36 Applicant I ,s:,requesting .Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee 37 consideration of site and architectural plans for a proposal to construct Stratford • 38 Place (Gatti Nursery) — a 46 -unit single family and 46 -unit townhouse subdivision 39 on a 17- acre ,parcel at 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway east of the future Gatti Attachment 4 Draft SPARC Minutes February 26, 2004 1 Park. This is a resubmittal of the project at this address denied by SPARC at the 2 1/8/04. meeting. • 3 4 Tiffany Robbe presented the staff report. 5 6 Chair Rittenhouse: Asked Craig Spaulding, City Engineer to address conformance for a 7 Final Map. 8 9 Craig Spaulding- The Final map needs to be in substantial conformance with the 10 Tentative Map. 11 - 12, Ed Anchordoguy, Parks & Recreation: Will.become;a. landscape district; and public areas 13 to be maintained by the City. Have a, problem with Virginia at the creek. Mixed use of 14 native and:non- native plants in the urban separator does not work. Suggested doing, either 15 non-nafiVe,or native and do not mix. Regarding spreading vine on Yorkshire — want to 16 know what it is. 'Removable, wood bollards do not hold up after time_, use:metal'where 17 removable. 18 1.9 R.J. Wilson, Delco Builders: We have, addressed comments and concerns specifically 20 regarding the alley, providing some relief with planting., Offsetting sortie of the buildings 21 to provide a better visual, adding parking for visitors and' striping area for trash pick -up 22. day, and keypad to open middle unit garage door from alley. 23 24 Committee ;identified issues to be addressed: • 25 ❑ Parking for deliveries 26 ❑ Trash pick up'and storage 27 ❑ Door from -alley into garages 28 ❑ Mailbox -placements 29 ❑ Garbage, yard waste; recycling cannot be left in alley (add statement in CC &Rs) 30 31 Landscape architect Provided optional plant palates for sun and shade; will change 32 species oftrees to comply with approved street tree list; vines on Yorkshirerto be from 33 list, like fardenbutgia; town homes, and single fam'i'ly homes will have- sun and shade 34 palates; trees without adequate planterspace will bechanged out. Will.change the,native 35 and non - native combination at the' Urban Separator., Will also address the removable 36 bollards., Will change Chinese `Pistache at Capri Creek side of Yorkshire. Will provide 37 large c'anopy'trees where there 'is room to do so (Churchill). 38 39 Chair Rittenhouse-. What tree do you'propose 'in, the alley way next to the garages. 40 41 Landscape architect: Oleander in planter strip would probably max out at 6 feet and 42 Crepe Myrtleip space between .buildings. 43 44 Committee Member Barrett- Consider, something more columnar? 45 46 Landscape Architect; I agree,'however, it may require more maintenance. 2 Draft SPARC Minutes February 26, 2004 1 Public comment opened 2 3 Rob Lewis: Sak Management: Have concerns. about:the oleanders — theirs all died. 4 Have a concern about the town homes that face Capri Creek Apartments. 5 6 Public comment closed: 7 8 Committee Comments: 9 10 Committee Member Gracyk_: Landscaping: Would like the applicant to address all of 11 Ed's concerns: suggest; using native 'plants on urban separator, change oak to valley or 12 live oak. Tree choices: glad you are willing: to use the list. Olives are a problem on 13 Belgrave for ADA clearance. Locust trees get insects. Appreciate the sunshade planting 14 palate. Have a problem with S4 plants, medium shrubs— in only 2 -ft wide planting 15 places these,are too big. Juniper should be a stricta variety. For ground cover, suggest 16 catina perfume. Still a problem with. plants in the alley — is very narrow. Crepe Myrtle 17 will be problematic there. The trees in the alley will likely be damaged during trash pick 18 up. Sidewalks do not always connect ,to the paths, example on Yorkshire. Vines that you 19 mentioned on Yorkshire would work — do a mix to have color. 20 You have made many efforts to make this project work, but it still has inherent problems. 21 Efforts made seem to be prop_ ping the project up rather than fixing it. You are trying to 22 make the trash pickup work, and the trees and the visitor parking — believe it still does not • 23 work. Trash pickup is a,problem —there is not enough space to keep trash and recycling 24 containers out of the driveways. Belgrave. Street is riot ADA compliant. Private 25 landscaped areas maintained by the HOA will become an issue. Appreciate the effort on 26 the architecture of the end units. Do not know where you go from here. Have not seen 27 the lighting yet. 28 29 Committee Member Barrett: Concur with Janet and Edon, the landscaping. Landscape 30 keeps coming back without all the.issues being addressed. Do not like the choice of 31 oleander. Do not know if it is a possibii'ity to designate that units closest to Belgrave put 32 trash containers there instead of the alley. Janet's metaphor of propping the project up is 33 not a fix. Circulation is still a, problem and trash day. Having "no- parking — during the 34 day except for delivery trucks" designated at a few parking spaces seems like an 35 improvement. 36 37 Chair Rittenhouse: Had a meeting with the applicant where a number of issues were 38 discussed. I made a_ number of suggestions and am happy that an attempt was made to 39 address some of those issues. Unfortunately, I still have the same fundamental comments 40 on the town homes re" trash pickup, deliveries to town homes guest parking, man doors 41 to all garages and.massing. Applicant could have shifted units back. and 'forth to get man 42 doors. Casa de Sol in'S'anta Rosa is a similar project — very unappealing project at the 43 alleyway, especially on trash. day. I appreciate the attempt to deal with some issues; 44 however, I cannot support this part of the project. r� L 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Draft SPARC Minutes February 26, 2004 M/S Gracyk/ Rittenhouse to deny town homes due :to inherent problems with trash pickup, deliveries, rear access to town homes, site circulation, proximity of guest parking. • 3 -0. Public hearing over @ 5:55 Adjournment: 7:20 SASparcNinutes Excerpt \Gatti 022604 doc • 0' 4 • CITY OF PETALUMA CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM Community Developmen0epartment, Planning Division, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952 (70.7) 778- 4301.Fax (707) 778 - 4498 E -mail: planning@ci.petaluma.ca.us DATE: February 26, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. III TO: Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee FROM: Tiffany Robbe, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Consideration of site and architectural plans for .a proposal to construct Stratford Place (Gatti Nursery) —'a 46 unit single family and 46 unit townhouse subdivision on a 17 -acre parcel at 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway east of the future Gatti Park (APN 137- 070 -079, File 04 -SPC- 0070 -CR). This is' a resubmittal of the project at this address denied by SPARC at their 1/8/04 meeting. BACKGROUND • This subdivision is part of a larger isubmittal, which included a rezoning to PUD, a tentative parcel map, and a mitigated negative declaration. The,Planning Commission heard the project on April 8` and May 13` 2003, and at the later date recommended that the City Council approve the project. The Petaluma City Council heard the project on July 14 and August 41 1h 2003, and at the later date, approved the entitlements requested. SPARC first formally reviewed the I project November 13` at which time they continued the project to give the applicant time to respond to their comments. On January 8, 2004, SPARC unanimously denied the project after the applicant indicated their unwilling to make the kind of townhouse site plan changes that SPARC required. The applicant felt these types of changes would result in major map modifications and the loss of the townhouse units. On January 22 °d , the applicant appealed SPARC's denial of their project to the City Council. On February 4` the applicant indicated to staff that they would be submitting. a new SPARC application with site plan modifications, which they hoped would relieve SPARC's primary issues regarding the functionality of the townhouse.portion of the site plan. The project is before SPARC for approval of the: 1. PUD Development Plan 2. Building Elevations 3. Landscaping Plan 4. PUD Development Guidelines Page 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • The 17.17 -acre site is "located on the east-side of Sonoma Mountain Parkway, east of :the City park site. Access to the subdivision will be' from Casella Way and Yorkshire Road. On the east side of the parcel, thirty- fvetwo -story and eight one -story single- family detached homes are .proposed. Six house plans are propo ed and these range from 2,075 to 2,612 square feet. Every"ptan has a two -car garage and two parking spaces in the driveway. Twenty of the house plans fit together in a "zipper lot" configuration (see Attachment E, Development .Plan). On the, west side of the_pareel, forty -six two -story ;attached townhomes are proposed. The . townhomes are attached in groups of two and three units, forming duplexes or triplekes.' Each townhouse will be 1,524 to 1;544 square feet with a two -car garage accessed' from an alleyway at the rear. 1VModifieations to Address SPAROs Townhouse Site Plan Concerns SPARC clearly stated that their denial of the project was due to their' dissatisfaction with the townhouse site, plan. More specifically, SPARC stated that the townhouse area had functional problems,. particularly with regard to trash pick up and storage, proximity to guest parking, and getting yard ,maintenance equipment' from the middle .unit= garage to that front yard. For further detail, see the SPARC' excerpt minutes, attachment C. With this resubmittal of the Stratford/Gatti subdivision and in an effort to address; SPARC's concerns about the functionality of the townhouse area„ the applicant proposes the following site Plan changes: Widening the" alleys from 24, feet to 28 feet in order to provide more space for trash containers on pick =up day (which results in the townhouse park green being 7 'feet narrower and in the elimination , of the planter island. which had been between the 7 parking spaces at the top ofthe park). ® Constructing planter strips between the attached units that extend four feet into the, alley to green the alley and provide visual relieve. o Offsetting attached townhouse units four feet. (formerly two feet) from one 'to the next to provide. some articulation in the alleyway. • Adding four additional on- street /guest parking places near those units (58 to 62 and 77 to 81), which were previously farthest'from on- street/guest parking spaces. • Striping areas in the alley, between end units to designate where to place trash receptacles on trash day, ® Sett ng up the Homeowner's Association to provide front yard maintenance for 'the townhouse units, eliminating the necessity of hauling yard maintenance equipment from the garage to the front yard. Additionally; the applicant endeavored to propose as part of this project .those, modifications that the Committee agreed upon prior to their denial of the former project (see attachment Q. These" items Page 2 have either been shown on. the new plan set or added. as conditions of project approval at the • applicant's request. These items are as follows:. ® Two front Y and alternatives (P atio. or no patio) p rovided for each of the three general sizes p ) are of townhouse front yards (see sheet L -4.). And three palettes are provided for the sunny front yards and three palettes for the shady front yards. ® Property lines at lots 1 though S have been slightly shifted so-that the bay windows on lots 3, 5, and 7 maintain a 6'Y240ot setback (previously 5 feet)' from the side yard property line (see sheet D -1). • Corner townhouse units (lots 47, 57, 58, 69, 70, 81., 82, and 92) have been revised (see sheet A- 24). Elements, such-as- second floor glass doors with a Juliet railing, emphasis roof overhangs, decorative railings, bulked up second -floor window ledges, and window grids have been added. ® The false windows have been removed from the townhouse gable ends (see sheet A.19 etc). ® Side doors shall be depicted at all end townhouse garages; pursuant to condition 8a. Easements will not be necessary for icomer units as the doors will open to semi- public /homeowner association land or public /parks` land. • A meter door with added detail is included as a separate 11" by 1.7" sheet with the architecture plans. • • The Plan 6 P orch shall be 6 feet deep (by extendingthe porch closer to the street) pursuant to condition 8d. ® The side garage and master' bathroom windows on Plan 4 have been eliminated as they sit on the property line (see sheet. A-A 0): © Shutters have been eliminated from all side elevations. ® Upgraded windows are consistently shown on the side and "rear elevations of the detached houses. ® Horizontal siding. shown on the front elevations of Plans 2C, 3'B, 4C is now also shown on the side elevations;( sheet A,06 etc). m Cultured stone has been eliminated from the project. The applicant proposes to use brick on all plans where the cultured stone was previously shown (brick, does not require any separation from the soil). The revised architecture plans graphically shown brick on these elevation B units (sheets A.02, A.05, A08, A.11, A.14, and A,16). Unfortunately,, the label did not get changed and still reads cultured stone veneer. Thus, staff recommends that condition 8b be maintained to ensurethe removal of the cultured stone. • o The front windows on the Plan 5 with side entry garage shall line up horizontally, pursuant to condition 8c. Page 3 • 100 -year FEMA proximity to lots 39, 57, 58, and 81 will be disclosed pursuant: to condition '10. • Fence height shrubbery, rather than a fence will serve to screen the Lot 8 garage from the • gh _t s b _._ry, g g urban separator (see Sheet L -1). The street trees have been reconsidered (sheet L -1). However, the proposed' locust is not on the approved street tree list. The' city arborist recommends against the locusts as in Sonoma County it gets an insect infestation (Pod !Gall Midge), which makes the, tree unattractive and eventual kills it. Additionally, Chinese pistache continues to be depicted. in the 3 -foot wide Planter abutting Capri Creek Apartments, though a 4 -foot minimum width -is required for this species. Also, while SPARC ,directed that the use of pear trees. be ;reduced' and only utilized where the planter width is too narrow for canopy type trees and while their' use has been significantly reduced from the previous plan, the one place where they are iutilized is on Churchill'Drive, which has a 6 -foot wide planter strip. Condition 6a specifies that the street trees ,shall, be,subJect to staff review , and approval and subject to the City's Street Tree List and that canopy trees be utilized where possible. • Fencing on lots ,11 and 26 and similar lots was corrected to show the fence. at the rear of the porch, rather. than mid -porch (see sheet L -1). • The exterior. lighting (porch, garage -side and alley) will be presented at the SPARC hearing. • Air conditioning units, are: now _ prohibited in the side yards pursuant %to the. PUD Guidelines, see attachment D page 8. section 3.13. • The PUD, Guidelines' were amended. to .specify that SPARC is the review body for plan or elevation revisions to accommodate market conditions, see attachment D page 4. PUBLIC NOTICE The project was noticed 'in. the Argus Courier. on February 1.1, 2004 and notices were mailed to property owners and occupants within five hundred feet, of'the subject property. At the writing of this, staff report, staff has not received anycomments concerning the proposed project. ATTACHMENTS. A. Draft Site, Plan. and Architectural Review Findings B. Draft Site Plan and Architectural Review Conditions of Approval C. SPARC.M nutes Excerpt from,Januar 8',.2004 D. PUD Development Guidelines updated' February 18, 2004 E. Development Plan dated February 1T, 2004 -full and 1`1x 7 (SPARC members only) F. Landscape -Plan dated February 17, '2004 full and 11 x 17 (SPARC' members only) G. House /Townhouse Architecture Plans dated February 17, 2004 - full and llx.17' ( SPARC members only) s \spare \reports\Gatti Sub SPO • Page, 4 .1 2 • 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 L 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 1 5. 6 47 48 49 ATTACHMENT A ' SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL, REVIEW FINDINGS : Stratford Place /Gatti Subdivision 710 Sonoma'Mountain Parkway behind Gatti Park APN 137- 070 -079 Project File No. 04SPCO70CR 1. The Site. Plan and Architectural Review Committee ,(SPARC), authorizes the proposed construction of 46' detached single family residences and 46 townhomes with the associated roadways, landscaping paths, utilities and approximately 7 acres dedicated to the City for park, creek corridor, and/or urban separator purposes. 2. The project, as conditioned, will conform to the intent, goals and policies of the Petaluma General Plan. 3. The project, as conditioned, will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to the public welfare of the community because it will be operated in conformance with Performance Standards specified in the Uniform Building Code and the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance. 4. The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration at its meeting of August 4, 2003 and all mitigation measures identified in the Initial :Study are herein incorporated. 5. The plan for the .proposed development is compatible with the area and the PUD Development Guidelines will ensure that the proposed development and uses are compatible. 6. The proposed structures and site. plan, as conditioned, conform to the requirements of Site Plan and Architecture Review Standards for Review of Applications 26 -406 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance 'as: a. Quality materials are, used appropriately and the units within the project are in harmony and proportion to the each other and to the surrounding structures; b. The architectural style,of`theunits is appropriate for the project and compatible with other structures in the, 'imrnediate neighborhood; C. The siting of the new structures is comparable to the siting of other structures in the immediate. neighborhood; d. The bulk, height, and color of the new structures. is ,comparable to the bulk, height, and color of other structures in the immediate neighborhood•, e. The landscaping 'is in keeping with the character and design of the site and the surrounding area; and f. Ingress, egress; internal traffic circulation, pedestrian. ways, and adequate parking have been designed to promote safety and convenience. Page 5 ATTACHMENT B 2 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL �. 4 Stratford Place /Gatti S'ubdivision 5 710 Sonoma. Mountain Parkway Ibehind, Gatti ;Park. 6 APN.1'37-07& =079 7 Project File No..04S'PC0070:CR 8 9 1. All .mitigation measures and findings adopted 'in conjunction with approval of the 10 Mitigated Negative Declaration ( Resolution 2003 - 1;58 N.0 S;)' for the Stratford 11 Place /Gatti subdivision project are - herein incorporated by reference as conditions of 12 project approval. 13 14 2. All conditions /findings adopted in conjunction with Ordinance No. 21'60 approving the 15 Rezoning to Planned Unit District for the Stratford Place /Gatti subdivision project are 16 herein incorporated by reference, as conditions of'project approval. 17 18 3. All. conditions /findings adopted in, conjunction with Resolution : 2003 -159 N.C.S. 19 approving a. 92 -lot Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map are - herein incorporated by 20 reference as.conditions of project approval. 21 22 4. All conditions /findings adopted in conjunction- with Resolution 2003 -160 N.C.S. 23 approving the Planned Unit District pevelopment Guidelines for the Stratford Place /Gatti 24 subdivision project are herein incorporated "by reference as conditions of project approval. 25 26 5. The plans submitted:for building -permit review shall be in substantial,conformance with 27 those plans dated February 17, .2004 '(on f le in `the Petaluma Community Development 28 Department, Planning Division) except as modified by thel following conditions., 29 30 6. Prior to Improvement Plan approval, the landscape plan shall be,modified to ,depict 31, a) Street trees which are compatible with the List of Approved Street, Trees or 32 approved by City.arborist and which provide a tree canopy where possible„ 33 b) Sun or palette designated. for each;lot, 34 c) A shared mailbox structure for 'each duplex /triplex, on lots 47 -57 and, 82 -92 and a 35 group mailbox structure for units 58 769 and one for units 7,041 located at the top of 36 the townhouse park. 37 38 7. Prior to Improvement Plan approval 39 a) A ,bollard light ;sha11 be depicted adjacent to the. bridge and low- wattage ;lighting 40 shall be depicted to cast a soft wash of light underneath. the bridge without creating. 41 a glare 42 b) A keystone type, masonry :retaining wall; shall be. depicted for all retaining walls 43 exceeding 1 foot in height, and 44 c) The Private .Alley Exhibit shall be :incorporated and depict concrete pavers (not. 45 stamped concrete) at the alleyway entries. 46, 47 8. Prior to issuance of any unit or master building, permit, Page 6 Z • 3. 4 5' 6 7 9 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 4 5 26 a) Sidedoors with a small hard surface landing shall be depicted at all end townhouse garages, b) Cultured stone shall not be proposed or utilized,. c) The front windows, on "Plan 5 side entry garage" shall line up horizontally, and d) The Plan 6, porch shall be six -feet deep. Prior to issuance of any townhouse building permit, the SPARC approved low- wattage photosensitive residential -type fixture shall be shown garage -side on all rear townhouse elevations and the electrical sheet shall show this fixture to be a part of each unit's system, but without a switch. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any townhouse or house other than elevation C, the front exterior fixtures shall be reviewed and approved by staff. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all exterior light fixtures shall be shown to be downcast and. provide a soft "wash" of light against the wall and shall conform to City Performance Standards. No lighting shall produce a direct glare. 10. Prior to certificate of occupancy deed restriction shall be recorded on the Title Report of lots 39, 57, 58, and, 81 noting the existence of the FEMA 100 -year floodplain line immediately over the property line (lots 58 and 81) or within the front yard (lots 39 and 57), as shown on the Final Map. Standard SPARC Conditions Of Approval: 11 12. 27 28 The site shall be kept cleared at all times of all garbage.and debris. At no time shall future activities exceed Performance Standards specified in the Uniform Building Code Section 22 -301 of the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance (dust, odor, etc.), and the 1987 City of Petalurria General Plan. 29 13. External downspouts shall be painted to match background= building colors. Scuppers 30 without drainage pipes may not be installed because of probable staining of walls 31 (overflow scuppers are excepted). 32 33 14. All trees shall be .a minimum fifteen - gallon size (i.e. trunk diameter of at least 3 /4 inch 34 measured one foot above the ground) unless otherwise specified (e.g.: 24" box or 35 specimen size) and, double , staked; all shrubs shall be five-gallon size. All landscaped 36 areas not improved with lawn shall be protected with two -inch deep bark mulch as a 37 temporary measure until the ground cover is established. 38 39 15. All planted areas shall be served by a. City approved automatic underground irrigation 40 system. 41 42 16. All planting shall be .maintained in good growing condition. Such maintenance shall 43 include, where appropriate, pruning, mowing, weeding, cleaning of debris and trash, 44 fertilizing and regular watering. Whenever necessary, planting shall be replaced with 45 other plant materials to insure continued compliance with applicable landscaping 40 6 requirements:. Required irrigation systems shall be fully maintained in sound operating 47 condition with heads periodically cleaned and replaced when missing to insure continued 48 regular watering of landscape areas, and health and vitality of landscape materials. Page 7