HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 6.B-Attch05 03/03/2003Planning Co1whission Minutes
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
® 34
35
36
1
ATTACHMENT 5
City of Petaluma, California
City Council Chambers
City Hall, II English Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
Telephone 707/778 - 43011 Fax 707/7784498
E -Mail plannift ,ci petaluma:ca.us
Web Page http ://www
Planning Commission Minutes EXCERPT
September 24, 2002 - 7.00 PM
Commissioners: Present: Asselmeier, Barrett, Dargie,:Glass, McAllister
Absent: O'Brien, von Raesfeld
* Chair
Staff. George White, Planning, Manager
Laura Lafler, Proj'ect;Planner
Anne Windsor, Administrative Secretary
Time public hearing began: 7:.05
NEW BUSINESS;
PUBLIC HEARING:
I. ROCKRIDGE POINTE, Windsor Drive & Western Avenue
AP No: 020 -030 -037, 039, 013, &, 015
File: ANX00004 PUD00004; PRZ00001; TS'1YI00003
Planner: Laura Lafl'er
The applicant is requesting that ,the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to
the : City Council to approve a proposal to prezon& the property to Planned Unit
Development (PLTD), to 'annex to the City of Petaluma and to subdivide a 123 -acre parcel
-into 62 residentialaots.
Chair Glass: Introduced the project.
Laura Lafler: Presented the staff report. Presented a letter from Tom and Chris
Hergenrother of 234 Edinburgh Lane who are opposed to the project:
Vin Smith: Presented the revised project.
Doyle Heaton Applicant: Thanked staff and presented the changes to the project.
}
Planning Commission Minutes September 24, 2002
i
Chair Glass: Asked to have a peer review of the geotechnical report.
• 2
3
4
Dan Hale, Hale & Hunt Architects: - Presented the site plan and the architecture of the
5
project.
6
7
Mike Milani, Milani and Associates: Addressed Commissioner Barrett's question
8
regarding keying and benching of the fill as presented in the Giblin letter of July 24,
9
2002.
10
11
Public hearing opened:
12
13
Marne Coggan, Victoria Homeowners Association:: As a private citizen and resident of
14
Victoria, thanked the applicant for the changes.and the project as proposed. As a member
15
of Victoria Homeowners Association, extended a congratulations to the developer.
16
Recommerded'that they work out an agreement for Rockridge and Victoria residents to
17
share maintenance costs for parks. Asked that agreement be completed before project is
18
completed.
19
20
Susan McGavin, 297 Cambridge Lane: Thanked the applicant for addressing traffic
21
concerns of Victoria .residents. Want both traffic circle at Windsor, Cambridge and
22
Edinburgh complete with landscaping and the oval median at Cambridge and `Windsor to
23
be part of the first phase of construction. Want to make sure construction pis in
24
accordance with noise and construction requirements. Want detention basin to be
25
aesthetically pleasing or it-will attract vandalism — how will applicant deal with .this .issue.
26
Need to provide an alternative for truck traffic between D and Western..
27
28
Tom Hergenrother, 234 Edinburgh: Commented on the exchange of use of parks — asked
29
that the Victoria Residents association be included. .
30
31
Patricia Tuttle Brown, PBAC: Wanted to clarify the status of public open space of the
32
project. PBAC and Parks and Recreation opposed to private open space. Referred to
33
Condition of Approval 101. Project has: improved in many ways, however, regarding
34
public access the project has deteriorated. Asked the Planning .Commission to keep the
35
paths as proposed in the original project. Asked to add to Condition 9 comments that the
36
PBAC committee wants: no fences; signage on 'the trailhead; car parking on Windsor
37
Drive and striping' on Western Avenue. Detention basin amenity for entire public —want
38
paths next to it and suggested that homeowners maintain paths near detention'basin.
39
40
Elaine Lucia, 1177 Western Avenue: Have strong objection to the project due to traffic
41
concerns on Western Avenue, particularly related to traffic going to the Junior High as
42
well as traffic on Western and Webster. Also there are many animals on the project site —
43
concerned as to what will happen to them as well.
44
45
Scott Loveless, 290 Cambridge Lane: In favor the project. Concerned about the speed
•
46
limit on Windsor Drive changing to 35 mph from Victoria to Western Avenue. Would
47
like to see it remain at 25 mph. Would like traffic circles incorporated into the plans.
2
Planning Commission Minutes September 24, 2002
• 1w
2 Public hearing closed:
3
4 Reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
5
6 Vin Smith: Responded to public comments regarding the project. Looking for direction
7 from the Planning Commission regarding private vs public open space. Committed to
8 doing both traffic calming measures.
9
10 Commission Comments:
11
12 Commissioner Dargie Feel the project has improved. Would like Parcels B and D to be
13 open space. Suggested,,developer reimplement access paths. Agree that a second soils
14 report should be conducted.
15
16 Commissioner McAllister: Concerns are visual quality to the neighborhood and the City.
17 Development seems to be in. the right place, yet it feels a bit crowded and lots 14 -17
18 hanging above Victoria. Want, to see sections through the graded areas. Lots 31 and 32
19 are of concern to me. Have no way of judging what you can see from Western or
20 Windsor from the materials presented. Possibly lst6ry poles. Would like open space
21 woven through the development make lots 4 and 5 smaller. Do not see how the trees
22 can be maintained on Parcel C with the amount of - grading being done. Think there is an
• 23 opportunity to make the detention basin a more aesthetic piece of the development.
24 Wanted to know why a landscape :plan was+ not submitted — would like to see how the
25 whole landscape concept would work. Would prefer the width of the road to be reduced
26 where possible. Can you narrow entry road adjacent to Parcel B? Would like to see
27 sidewalk separate from the curb. 'Thought SPARC was looking for a rural vernacular.
28 Want to give strong direction to SPARC — do not want a themed housing fagade.
29
30 Commissioner Barrett: Commissioners Dargie . and McAllister did not weigh in on
31 Condition No.26. Want to see, what the view: is from Howard, Western, and Chileano
32 Valley Road. Want the devel'oprrient to have a lo W" profile. Share concerns of lots 14 -17
33 — would like story poles or a better visual for how it fits in to the location. Need to have
34 discrepancies worked out on the plans or written 6n 'paper re traffic calming measures.
35 Want the issue of traffic at the Junior High looked' into is it possible to have a
36 crosswalk? May'b:e an issue that needs to be referred to traffic committee. Agree with a
37 second geotechnical report. Would like dedicated. open space to be public.
38
39 Commissioner Asselmeier: In favor of the direction of the project. In favor of public
40 access on Parcels B and.D and to the extent in the area of the detention pond — would like
41 that to be :an.. amenity. Want to access other ways of holding the open space. Would like
42 to know where the trail would be. on the 40 acres — want to 'know where the paths
43 connect. Think it, is, also appropriate to take out the fences and have public parking
44 below. Consider all rne8ures to enhance the wetlands. Encourage benches along the
0 45 trails. Would like City Council to coordinate with Sonoma County re: trails and linkage.
46 Have concerns about: traffic — want the agreements regarding the traffic calming and
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Planning Commission Minutes September 24 2002
A
reducing the speed limit included. Recommend that the City Council talk with the •
County regarding improvements to Western Avenue.
Commissioner Glass: Would like all suggestions of the PBAC to go forward to the City
Council. Want a connection from the project to the Junior High ;School. Speed limit
should; be 25 mph on Windsor from D to Western. Would like parking on Windsor Drive
to access Helen Putnam Park. Second opinion' on 'soils report. Prefer narrower streets if
possible. Like the architecture - think rural architecture ok also. Ok with condition X26 -
sidewalk on one side. Would like to see if we can work out the open space to be public
access. Would like a drinking fountain in Helen Putnam Park and benches.
Commissioner McAllister: Would like sections to represent what - the project, will look
like :from adjacent properties when this is returned to the Planning Commission. Would
like the open space clustered throughout the project. Would like to see some smaller
house plans.
Commissioner Dargie Would like the Planning Commission to come up -with an
agreement regarding the open space before making a recommendation to council.
Commissioner 'Barrett; - Would like the traffic calming measures "to be Jn written form
before coming back to Planning Commission and would like to have Western Avenue
traffic issues discussed with the County.
Issues to be addressed by applicant before the next meeting.
• Visual quality of project' from Howard, Western and Chilean Valley Road
• Second Soils report
• Sections showing cut and fill, houses, neighboring properties, stoty
• Clarify'specific trees to be retained
• Trail network'p_lans /landscape�plan, `including detention basin (conceptual)
e Safe route. to Junior High
. Resolve public /private open space issue
• Detail traffic calming measures
• Clarify improvements to Western Avenue in the county
• Incorporate all of PBAC's recomrnendations
• Reduce speed limit on Windsor Drive
• Allow parking on Windsor Drive
• Enhance wetlands
• Narrower streets
M/S'Barrett/McAllister to continue to October22, 2002.
All in favor.:
Commissioner O'Brien: Absent
Commissioner Dargie: No
Commissioner McAllister: Yes
4
Planning Commission Minutes
1
Chair Glass: Yes
2
Commissioner Barrett: Yes
3
Commissoner -von Raesfeld: Absent
4
Commissioner Asselmeier: Yes
5
6
Public hearing completed at 10 :00 p.m.
7
8
9
Adjournment: 10:15
10
.11
SAK- Planning Commission\Minutes\PC•Minutes 02 \092402.doc
•
0
5eptember 24, 2002
5