Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 92-291 11/16/1992 RCS®IUtlOl~l N®. 92-291 N ~.5. of the City of Petaluma, California RESOLUTION APPROVING THE UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND STANDARDS FOR SONOMA GLEN ESTATES SUBDIVISION, A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON CORONA ROAD WEST OF ELY ROAD, A 7.5 ACRE PORTION OF AP NO. 137-060-69 WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 1910 N.C.S., a 7.5 acre portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 137-060-69 has been rezoned to Planned Unit Development (PUD); and WHEREAS, by action. taken on October 13, 1992, the Planning Commission considered and forwarded a recommendation to the City Council on the Unit Development Plan and Development Standards for four single-family custom lots in said .Planned Unit District; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines have been satisfied through the preparation and certification of the Corona/Ely Specific Plan Environmental.Impact Report and that the project will conform to the Corona/Ely Specific Plan, and is therefore .exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 151.82 of the CEQA Guidelines; NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the following findings: Rezonin Findings: 1. The PUD development plan, as conditioned, results in a more desirable use of the land, and a better physical environment than would be possible under any single zoning district or combination of zoning districts through provision of density feathering near the Urban Separator. 2. The plan for the proposed development, as conditioned, presents a unified and organized arrangement of residential. buildings which are appropriate in relation to kes. n~o......9.2.-.2.9.1....... N.cs. Pg. 1 y adjacent and nearby rural properties and associated future residential projects, and adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure compatibility. 3. The natural and scenic qualities of the site will be protected through preservation of the Corona Road corridor, and existing trees, and adequate public access and utilities and private spaces are designated on the Unit Development Plan. 4. The development of the subject Sonoma Glen Estates property, in the manner proposed by the applicant and conditioned by the City, will not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City, and will be in keeping with the general intent and spirit of the zoning regulations of the City of Petaluma and with the Petaluma General Plan. 5. The PUD District is proposed on property which has a suitable relationship to one or more thoroughfares (Ely Road and Corona Road) to carry any additional traffic generated by the development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Sonoma Glen Estates Development Plan and Development Standards as referred by the Planning Commission and presented at the November 2, "1992 meeting of this Council is hereby approved pursuant to Section 19A-504 of Zoning Ordinance No. 1072 N.C.S., as amended, subject to the following conditions: PUD Conditions: 1. Prior to submittal for SPARC review, the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards shall be amended to reflect the following requirements: a. Proposed driveway locations along Corona Road shall be indicated on the final Development Plan. The proposed private access drive shall be identified by name, with paving area clearly delineated on the plan. b. The proposed 10' PUE shown adjacent to Corona Road shall be deleted. c. Proposed setback lines shown on the Development Plan shall be amended to reflect the following minimum standards: 1. Street frontages: 40'(designated front yard) 2. Interior side yards: 20' 3. Yards abutting private access easement: 40'(designated rear yard). d. Front and interior side setbacks on Lot 1 shall coincide with the septic system easement shown on that lot. Reso. 92-291 NCS 2 e. The proposed garage footprint and driveway proposed on Lot 1 shall he located and/or designed so as not to adversely affect the health of the significant trees in this area. f. Fence design details shall be incorporated into the proposed development standards for review and approval by SPARC. g. A statement of intent shall be inserted into the Development Standards, referencing applicable Corona/Ely Specific Plan provisions, Ordinances, Resolutions and other project conditions of approval. h. Large family day care homes shall be listed as a conditional use. i. The Development Standards shall be expanded to require that all grading, trenching, and construction activities maintain at least a 5' setback from the existing dripline of all trees required to be preserved, and that any proposal to encroach within 5' of the dr~pline, or to remove a specific tree identified for preservation, shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. An arborist's report shall accompany all lot development plans which are within 5' of the driplines of identified trees to be preserved. j. In addition to trees shown to be preserved on the development plan, the following trees on Lot 1 (shown to be removed) shall be identified for retention: 8, 41, 42, and 55. 2 k. The Development Plan and Development Standards shall incorporate amendments required under conditions of approval for the Tentative Subdivision Map, and shall reflect consistency with the Tentative Subdivision Map. Development of individual lots shall be subject to administrative SPARC review, with emphasis on the following: a. Preservation of existing trees along Corona Road and within Lots 1, 2, and 3. Proposed work closer than 5' from the outer perimeter of the driplines of trees., or necessitating removal of existing trees identified for preservation shall be subject to full SPARC review. b. Compatibility of proposed residential design plans with existing development along Corona Road and consistency with Corona/Ely Specific Plan provisions pertaining to the rural character of the subdivision site. c. Review of proposed grading, drainage and landscape plans for compliance with City standards, potential effects on existing trees, and appropriate transition at property boundaries. d. Review of proposed driveways along Corona Road for compliance with Specific Plan provisions, restricted (gated) access (with automatic opener), and design adequacy. e. Appropriate location and design of proposed accessory buildings and fencing in order to preserve open views along the public streets, and avoid "rear yard" presentations along street frontages. Reso. 92-291 NCS f. Review for appropriate addressing and mailbox location to facilitate emergency services and visitors. g. Review of parking for a minimum of 5 on-site spaces. h. Review of proposed utility line locations for impacts to existing trees. i. The applicant shall apply for SPARC approval to designate selected trees (determined by the Planning Director) on the 7.5 acre property for Heritage and Landmark designation. 3. The existing residence and water tower located on the proposed Lot 1 shall. be preserved. Any request for removal or demolition of this building shall be referred to the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee for consideration, and shall be accompanied by an archaeological report, prepared by a qualified archaeologist, containing an analysis of the historic significance of the building and recommendations. 4. Reproducible copies of the. PUD Development Plan and Development Standards shall be submitted in conjunction with the Final Map which incorporate all conditions of project approval. 5. Flexibility in building location and the ability to remove smaller, less significant trees (#38 - 49) shall be permitted to allow reasonably sized additions to occur to the home on Lot. 1. resoudp / counci110 Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (~~i~) meeting form on the 1.6th ................. day of ..........November------•--................., 19.92-., by the ``~ following vote: ...................... ... . . . City Attorney AYES: Read, Davis, Nelson, Vice Mayor Cavanagh, Mayor Hilligoss NOES: None ABSENT: Woolse obel ~_ /~ ATTES'T': - •----.~~ ........ ........ .........................v.~,.. C't Cl k CA 10-55 >t y er ? Gbuncil Fi)~~,.1..-. ~. G-.. Res. No.....92.-29.1........ N.c.s. 4 M~