HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6466 N.C.S. 12/03/1973 EER:mi 11-26-73
'elution No. 6466 N. C. Saf
ORIGINAL
RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE
GENERAL PLAN AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PLAN
INTRODUCED BY COUNCILMAN n /�� Al "�f
and
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN !i✓ 1 at a
Regular Meeting of the City Council of the
City of Petaluma, on the 3rd day of December
WHEREAS the. City. City Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed
amendments to the General Plan and the :Environmental Design Plan, and has
held a hearing thereon and after said hearing finds the proposed amendments
to the General Plan and the Environmental Design Plan should be adopted, and
WHEREAS , the City Planning Commission filed with the City Clerk on
the 13th day of November, 1973, its report as set forth in its Resolution
No. 24-73k75-j3 ; recommending adoption of said proposed amendments to the
General Plan and the Environmental Design Plan, and
WHEREAS , the City Council has reviewed the proposed amendments to
the General Plan and the Environmental Design Plan, and has held a hearing
thereon on the third day of December, 1973, and after said hearing finds
that the proposed amendments to the General Plan and the Environmental
Design Plan should be adopted,
NOW,. THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that the proposed amendments to the
General Plan and the Environmental Design Plan are hereby adopted in the
form as prepared by the staff, a copy of which is attached hereto and in-
corporated herein.
under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was.duly and regulary introduced and
adopted by the Council of the City of Petaluma on the 3rd
day of December 19:._7 3......., by the following votes:
AYES: • Councilmen Daly, Harberson, Mattei, Perry, Jr. , and
Mayor Putnam.
•
NOES: None.
•
ABSENT Councilmen_Bru tner and Cavanagh Jr.
City Clerk `- May or
FORM CA IO.73 ,.) ��
^ (MODIP CCATIO 'S TO THE
GENERAL PLAN
(Ps approved by. the
Planning Commission on Novemher 6 , 1973)
AREA NO. MODIFICATION
1 Rural to Medium Density Residential. (Proposed
Urban Density)
2 Proposed school site to Transitional
3 School &, Park site - Move to location as shown
on EDP'
4 Retail and Of flee. COmmercial to Medium Density
Residential (Proposed 'Urban Density Residential.)
5 School & Park site to Medium Density Residential
(Proposed Urban ,Density.) and Park site relocated
as shown on EDP
6 Medium Density Residential to approximately 3
acres of Retail and Office Commercial
7 Show Parks as shown on EDP
B School replaced by Park for Flood Plain Area;
Planned Res idential for remainder of area
9 Show Trails as shown on EDP
10 General Industrial to Rural
li Park & Low & Medium Density Residential -
Relocate Part; Locations to cover approximate
area as shown in Areas .(Ell & .442
12 Low Density Residential to School Site & Path
13 petal & Office Commercial , .and Service &
Thoroughfare Commercial to Transitional
14 Retail. & Office Commercial to Medical Offices
15 MediuM Density and Retail & Office Commercial to
Urban High Density
16 Transitional - No Change
17 Medium Density Residential. to Urban High Density
•
MODIFICATIONS TO THE
ENV.iPpNMENTAL DESIGN PLANS
As approved by the
planning Commission on November 6., 1973)
AREA NO. rAnoirIcATIcw.
20 Office S. Neighborhood Commetcidl to Study Area
21. Specific" Planning Area to Industrial
22 Speedgl StUdV Area to Medium DenSitV ReSidentiai.
23
24 Special Study Area to Community Commercial.
25 Special StUdy Area to Community Commercial
26 Special Study Area to industrial
27 ..led0Strial to SeiVice CoMMercial
28 Urban Low Density Residential to Neighborhood
Commercial
29' Service Commercial to industrial
30 Medium Density Residential to :
.1.1 Strip along Petaluma Blvd, to SerVide CoMMereial
:21 Interior portion- as Urban Low Density
31 High Density ReSidential to Special Study Area
32 High Density Residential to Medium Density
Resiencial (Proposed Nrban Density Residential)
33 Office - No change
34 Industrial to Service Commercial
3.5 80godal stuffy Area. to Planned Residential for portion
With proposed development and Agriebitural/Open
Space for remainder to include, location of the
greenbelt
36 1) High density residential to Commercial for one
lot depth along Petaluma Blvd , No
2) Area adjacent :to the west and along Keller &
Kentucky Streets south from urban low density
to high density. residential
High density residential to Special Study Area
38 Urban LoW Density Residentidi to V:edinm Density
Residential (PrepoSed Urban Density)
39 Medium Density Residential to Planned Residential.
40 Agtisult-O'car/oPen iFiace. to a Special Study Area
41 Service Commercial & Medium Density Residential to
Yndgstrial
42 P.atK & Low I Medium. Densiity Residential -
Expand park to cover apprOximately same area as
shown in Areas #I1 & [4.2
REPORT TO: City Council November 13 , 1973
FROM: Department of Community Development
SUBJECT: Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan,
the Environmental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning
INTRODUCTION :
State law, AB 1301 , has required that County or City zoning ordinances
shall be consistent with the General Plan of the County or City. In
the spring of 1973 , Petaluma adhered to that law by a number of modifica-
tions to the General Plan. At that time the Planning Commission
suggested that further changes be made in order that the City' s Environ-
mental Design Plan shall also be consistent with both the General Plan
and the Master. Plan of Zoning. While not specifically required by State
law, such a step is both logical and wise as the EDP is both a middle-
range document between the General Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning
and our most recently adopted land use policy document.
Upon study of the various necessary changes , it was found that changes
were required to all three documents , In addition , it is suggested
that certain study areas on the EDP can be changed at this time from
study designation to more specific land use designations .
DEFINITIONS :
State law, AB 1725 , has defined "consistent" as, "The various land uses
authorized by the ordinance are compatible with the objectives , policies ,
general land uses and programs specified in such a plan. " Therefore ,
the plans are consistent if an area on the Master Plan of Zoning is zoned
for a residential use and the EDP shows the area as a commercial use
since the commercial is a higher use of the land and if the objectives
and policies of the City are aimed towards the development or redevelop-
ment of that area to the higher. use .
In addition, it should be noted that consistency does not propose that
the General Plan, the EDP and the zoning map all be exact replicas of
each other , but that they show a general logical progression of the
development of the City . Minor inconsistencies involving one or more
small lots are not relevant to general land use patterns .
In order to carry out these aims , earlier action established two new
land use categories to the Petaluma Area General Plano The transitional
designation indicates areas where there is a passing of one condition
to another over a period of time . The "-_panhandle" of the City involving
the Denman area and areas directly south along the freeway and the
Petaluma River provide the prime example of such a designation. Much
of the area was zoned f-L in the hopes of attracting more industry to
the City. But it has become increasingly apparent that not all that
area is required or is even desirable for industry . What is not so
apparent is the future land use for those areas not needed for industrial
growth or how much will not be needed. Therefore , the areas remain
zoned M-L, but ate designated as transitional pending specific develop-
ment plans . Within this context , transitional is also used to corres-
pond to special study areas on the Environmental Design Plans where the
central urban designation does not apply.
rm
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of. Zoning , November 13 , 1973
The central urban designation was established to provide a land use
category which incorporates abroad mix of commercial , office , industrial
and residential uses in the Central portion of the City and which permits
the flexibility in long ranee development policy that the General Plan is
designed to allow.
COMPLEXITY OF CHANCES :
Proposed modifications to the General Plan and the EDP as mentioned
earlier, to bring all three documents into consistency, proves to be a
complex matter, with changes to all three documents . At times , a change
to one document dictates a change to one or the other of the other two
documents . Certain changes will require more detailed land use studies
as will be indicated under the discussion of these changes .
TRANSPORTATION STUDY :
A forthcoming report will involve itself with a transportation study.
No changes to road alignments , designations , etc. , will be suggested
in this report.
SPECIAL STUDY AREAS :
Land use designations are recommended for a number of the Study Areas
on the EDP. No changes are proposed for two areas at this time. A
review of these areas follows.
The first to be :reviewed is the Special Study Area bounded by Washington
Street, Lakeville Street and "D" Street. This area involves the rail-
road yards and is presently zoned M-L. It would appear in light of
zone changes and proposed zone changes to Central Commercial involving
adjacent lands , that this entire area may evolve to commercial uses .
However , to change the EDP to indicate a commercial designation at this
point would require a change in the zoning of the Study Area in order
that the Zoning Map and the EDP might be consistent with each other.
In view of the fact that there are no development proposals for this
area, such a rezoning may well be premature. Therefore , it would appear
reasonable to show this Special Study Area to: remain in this designation
until such time as development. proposals Are presented and a rezoning
application As flied.
A similar situation exists for the Special Study Area which includes
flcNear Island, except in this particular case a portion of the Study Area
' may remain in .industria:i. use This area is further complicated by the
fact that that part of the island is not within the City limits , although
annexation has been proposed. Further study is required to determine
the appropriate land use for this entire Study Area .
RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS;
Considerable misunderstanding exists with regards to the residential
designations on the Generai 'Plan and the Envir-onmental Design Plan.
The General Plan has two residential designations , low density and medium
-2 _
i
Report oh Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental 'Design. Plan and the Master Plan of Zoninq,, .. November 13 , 1973
density. These densities are expected to reflect gross density over a
large average area rather than precise figures. However, the low density
is expected to reflect, generally , sudh zoning as R-1-10 ,000 to
R-1-20 ,000. The medium density generally reflects R-1-6, 500, R-C , R-M-G
and R-M-H zoning. Confusion arises when these designations are compared
to the Environmental Design Plans designations of suburban low, urban
low, medium, and high. The medium density designation of the EDP
describes a limited designation which is comparable to the R-M-G (Garden
Apartment) zoning , not the more encompassing designation as used on the
General Plan. Therefore , it is suggested that the designations on both
the General Plan and the EDP be changed in order that they might .be more
consistent with each other , and reflect more precisely the expected and
existing land use and zoning.
Following are the proposed designations compared to general zoning classi-
fications and approximate land use . It must be remembered that such
comparisons must be general or the General Plan and the EDP would no
longer be long range and middle range documents, but carbon copies of the
Zoning Ordinance .
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS :
General Zoning Approximate
General Plan EDP Classification Land Use
R-1-20 ,-000 -- Single-family on
Suburban Low Suburban Low lane lots
-R-1-10 , 000 q
R-1-6 , 500 Single-family
Urban Low -° R-C Duplex
Urban Planned Residential PUD-PCD Mix of residential
° types at 6 . 0 units
y maximum per gross
acre
ee
:Urban R-M-G Garden apartments
R-M-G Garden apartments
Urban High Urban High
High rise
apartments
Some overlap can be expected as per example , PUD zoning could occur in
urban low areas and R-1-6 , 500 in planned residential areas without
violation of the general policies and consistency of the documents .
RECOMMENDATION:
The resid.entail designations. on the General Plan be changed to suburban
low: density , urban density and urban high, density , and that the medium
residential designation on the •EDP be changed to urban and the high
residential designation be changed to urban high.
•
Report on Modifications tb the Petaluma At-ea General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of _Zoning, November 13 , 1'973
If these designation changes are adopted., three- areas on the General Plan
will require changing to reflect the new designation of urban high and to
be consistent with the EDP. There are more high density designations on
the EDP, but the remainder of these areas- fall into the General Plan
central urban designation. This designation was specifically set up to
Hover situations where there is , within a' relatively small area, a mix of
varying residential uses , commercial uses , office uses , and perhaps
industrial uses. The following are the areas recommended for change .
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE GENERAL PLAN :
AREA #1 :
Location - Easterly corner of Ely Road and Casa Grande within the
greenbelt
General Plan - Medium density residential and rural designation
EDP - Planned residential
Zoning - County "A" Agricultural
Land Use - Pasture land
Analysis - The EDP indicates all areas within the greenbelt as
areas to be designated for development. It is logical
progression and therefore consistent for the area to
change from County "A" to some residential zoning.
Recommendation - That Area #1 designated as rural on the General
Plan., be changed to medium density residential
(proposed urban density) ; medium density being
the designation which corresponds to the EDP
residential designations of the urban low, planned
residential , and medium density.
AREA 42 :
Location - North McDowell Blvd. and Lynch Creek adjacent to
Lucchesi Park
General Plan -. Indicates a Senior High School
EDP - Irdicatee a hospital site
Zoning - County "A" Agricultural.
Land Use - Mostly pasture - one louse
Analysis - The :General Plan text locates three new high schools on
the East side of the freeway. The Petaluma High School
is to accommodate West side students living within one
mile . The text admits that some West side students
will have to attend East side high schools, but because
-4-
•
1
Report on Modifications tr the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
each school will serve more East ,side students than
West side students, the three schools are located on the
East side. The text also states that under this plan only
one additional high sehool will be needed to serve the
rest of the high school district outside the planning
area. This last mentioned school has since been :built-,
the Rancho Cotati School .
Ten years later all these statements need careful re-
evaluation. The EDP calls 'for balanced growth which may
mean that it is more logical to locate one new high
school west of the freewav; Or„ since the high school
district encompasses the Cotati-Rohnert Park area, an
additional school to the already built Rancho Cotati
may be needed in this area to serve the rapidly increas-
ing Rohnert Park populations
All these factors _require careful consideration and will
be studied thoroughly in the forthcoming General Plan
review. In the meantime:, it is logical to bring the
General Plan into conformity with the EDP by changing
this area to indicate hospital facilities.
Staff Recommendation - Change Area #2 on the General Plan from
proposed high school site to proposed
hospital facilities .
Planning Commission Review - The seismic safety aspect was questioned
and it was suggested that if the recom-
mended change was made, another change
might he necessary next year .
Planning Commission Recommendation -- Change Area #2 to "Transitional. "
AREA
Location - East of Ely Road, near proposed Sonoma Mountain Road
General. Plan - Indicates .a school and park surrounded by medium
density residential
EDP' - Indicates an elementary school located on the other side of
Ely Road, to the west and north,
Zoning - County "A" , Agricultural.
Land Use - Farms and scattered houses
Analysis - This- suggested change is minor in nature for the purpose
Of Making the General Plan consistent with the EDP.
It involves moving the location of the elementary school
to conform to the EDP.
Recommendation - Move the location of. the elementary school and park
to conform to the location shown on the EDP.
-5-
Report on Modifications td the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
AREA #n.:
Location - Eli- Road and proposed Sonoma Mountain Road
General Plan - Retail and Office CoMMerc al
EDP - Indicates planned residential
Zoning - County "A" , Agricultural
Land Use - Scattered houses , pasture
Analysis - In order to make the General Plan consistent with the
EDP , it is necessary to change this area of retail and
office commercial to medium density residential (proposed
urban density) , or change. the EDP to indicate neighbor-
hood commercial for this area. Although standards would
indicate that a neighborhood shopping center would be
logical for this area, further study is necessary to
determine the need for commercial uses in this area. The
most recent document, the Environmental Design Plans ,
do not indicate a need for such a facility. Therefore ,
at this time it would appear most logical to bring the
General Plan into conformity with the EDP .
Recommendation - Change Area #4 from retail and office commercial
to medium density residential (proposed urban
density residential) .
AREA #5 :
Location - East of Ely Road
General Plan - Elementary school and neighborhood park
Zoning - County "A" , Agricultural
EDP - Planned residential
liand Use - Pastute
Analysis - The EDP , the City ' s most recent land use document, does
not show the need for an elementary school here in addi-
tion to the school sites shown south of Casa Grande and
near the proposed Caulfield Lane . There is shown a need
for a park in this area.. Therefore, it is proposed
that the school site be removed and the park site be
relocated to conform to. the EDP .
Recommendation - That the school site and park site be changed to
medium density residential (proposed urban density)
and the park site be relocated as shown on the EDP.
-6-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master. Plan -ct Zoning, November 13 , 19'73
• AREA #6 :
Location - Southwest corner of South McDowell Blvd. and Casa Grande
Road
General Plan - Medium dehsitY residential
EDP - Neighborhood commercial
Zoning - "A" Agricultural; rezoning to P .C . -- P .U .D. applied for
Land Use - Pasture - house
Analysis - The FDP indicates a need, for a neighborhood shopping
center in this area . Standards indicate that such a
center should serve residential areas within one-half
mile This proposed commercial area is more than one-
halt mile from the proposed center at Bavo:ood Drive
and Perry Lane .
Recommendation - Change Area #6 from medium density residential
to retail and office commercial , area to be
neighborhood commercial size , approximately three
acres .
AREA #7 :
Analysis - The FOP shows many more parks than are shown on the
Genera. Plan-, The text of the EDP discusses the need
for neighborhood parks and linear parks along the
Petaluma River to improve the urban form of the City ,
especially the. portion of the City east of the freeway.
Recommendation - in :order that the two documen.tshe consistent,
tree: parks shown on the EDP should also be shown
on the General Plan.
AREA #8 :
Location - Between the Petaluma River and the railroad tracks north.
of Pavan Street
General Plan - Elementary school and nark
EDP' - Park and planned residential
Zoning - County "A" Agricultural
Land Use, - Farm and pasture land
Analysis ^ The EDP does not indicate the need for a school in this
location , instead a school location is shown to the west
on the other side of Petalima Blvd . North. The current
school site is located partially in the flood plain which
could result in hazardous conditions for the children,. A
park along the river is, shown .
• Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the blaster Plan of Zoning., November 13 , 103
Recommendation - The school designation should be replaced by park
designation for the flood plain area and planned
residential for the remainder of the area.
AREA #9 :
Analysis - The EDP provides for trails along the linear parks
and oreeks and for trail links between these recreational
areas . With the increasing interest in bicycling , walk-
ing and jogging , the proposed location of these trails
should be indicated on the General Plan .
Recommendation - All trails shown on the EDP shall also be shown
on the General Plana
AREA #10 :
Location - West of the railroad spur and south of the small craft
harbor, and east of the freeway
General Plan - General Industrial
EDP - Agricultural open space
Zoning - M-L, County "A" (Agricultural) , County M-1 , County M-2 ,
Prezoned "A" (Agricultural )
Land Use - Vacant land, industrial plant , oil tank farm, truck stop
and cafe
Analysis - In order that the General Plan and the EDP are consistent
with each other, a change must be made to one of these
documents. - The proposed change to the General Plan from
general industrial to rural for the major portion of the
land was based on several factors. A large portion of
the land is either prezoned "A" (Agricultural) or in
County "A" (Agricultural) . A small portion of the land
in the• northwesterly portion of the area is zoned. M-L,
but most Of that portion has been suggested to remain in
the general industrial. designation due to the existing
zoning and due to the existing land use of a tallow plant
and a dump.., The land west of the Petaluma River is
zoned County P9-I and M-2 , hut since this is County zoning , .
it does not constitute inconsistency in terms of our
General Plan and EDP .
A second factor is consideration of the Environmental
Design Plans as the most recent document. When the EDP
was formulated a careful study was made of the industrially
dsignated and zoned land in and around the city . As a
result of this study, this area between the abandoned
railroad spur and the freeway was designated in agricul-
ture/open space .
-8-
a.
•
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma-Area General Plan; the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning, November 13 , 1973
A third factor is the ,fact that most of this land is in
Open space used for raising' oat -hay. The portion occupied
by the tallow plant and the dump have been left in the
industrial designation, The, majority of the area is within
the natural flood plain of the Petaluma River.
Recommendation - Change Area #I0 from general industrial designation
to rural designation.
AREA #11 :
Location - West of Hillcrest Hospital
General Plan - Park , low and medium density residential
EDP - Agricultural/open space; planned residential
Zoning - County "A" , Agricultural ; A-E, Exclusive Agriculture;
R-1-6 ,500
Land Use - Open land , several farm houses
Analysis - The General Plan proposes a large park for the hills
west of the City. The general location appears to be in
an area which is distinguished by a creek and lovely
oak woodland vegetation . The area would appear especially
well suited to a park generally designed for recreational
activities which would retain the natural landscape. Such
activities could include, picnic areas , hiking and equestrian
trails , and facilities , although there could be room for
a play field for more formalized recreation.
The EDP also proposes a park for the western hills , how-
ever , it is smaller in size and especially designated
to protect a. ridge which runs from behind the Hillcrest
Hospital northwest towards Western Avenue, This ridge
is subject to landslipnage , and upon field check twelve
slumps or small landslides were noted. Such slopes are
generally unsuited to development. Such conditions also
indicate that a park along this ridge he limited to
hiking trails in order to protect the unstable slopes .
It should be mentioned that oeonle hiking along such
trails would enjoy unparalleled view of the city and
valley from a number of Vista points .
In order that the General Plan and the EDP be consistent
with each other , it is necessary to resolve the two
park locations . However , if the EDP park location was
designated on both documents, the value of a more useable
park in a truly beautiful area Would be lost. If the
General Plan, park was chosen, the unstable ridge and
slopes would be left unprotected. A discussion with the
Sonoma County Pares. & Recreation nepartment revealed that
they are interested in this area of the western hills
-9-
•
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area .General Plan , the Environ-
_ mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of :Zoning , November 13 , 1973
for a subregional park. Such a nark might he a City-
County project and thus be large enough to encompass both
the oak woodland and the ridge . The County has indicated
that a subregional park in this general area has high
priority to be purchased at least in part over the next
few years., Therefore, it is proposed that the current
park shown on the General Plan be relocated slightly
to take better advantage of the oak woodland and avoid
an existing farmhouse, and expanded to include the unstable
ridge. (lt is further proposed that the EDP park be
expanded (Area #42) to include the oak woodland, thus
making the two documents consistent.
Recommendation - That the park locations in the western hills on
the. General Plan and the EDP be expanded and
relocated in order to cover approximately the same
area as shown in Areas ill and #42 ..
AREA #12 :
Location - Gossage Avenue and the proposed Sonoma Mountain Road
General Plan -- Low density residential (proposed suburban low)
EDP - School site
Zoning - County "A" , Agricultural
Land Use - Pasture - scattered houses
Analysis - This site was designated on the EDP to replace the
elementary school site located oh the General Plan in
Area #8 . The EDP is the more recent document and it
was felt that this area was the more logical location
for a school..
Recommendation - That Area #i2 he changed on the General Plan from
low density residential to elementary school site
and park,
AREA #13 :
Location - Bodega Avenue and Lohrman Lane - Strauhvilie
General Plan - Retail and. .office: commercial, service and thorough-
fare commercial
EDP - Agricultural/open space
Zoning - County "General Commercial" District
Land Use - Older residential uses , varied commercial uses tending
to be geared to highway service commercial or agricultural
commercial such as plant nursery; pump and well service ,
sand and gravel yard and service station.
-10-
Report on modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Matter Plan of Zoning, November 13 , '1973
Analysis - The proper and use designation of this area is a complex
and difficult question .. The land is zoned commercial by
the County and, is occupied by a mix of older and newer
commercial uses„ semi industrial uses and older residential
uses . The commercial designation on the General Plan
might be appropriate except that it is not consistent with
the EDP and it poses the problem of what limit can be
set. Are commercial uses to be allowed to proliferate
along this highway to Highway One? However , the agricul-
tural open-space designation of the EDP does not take
into account the parceling of the land. Most of the parcels
are top :small for agricultural uses , being 5 acres or less
and much less in some cases : There are 6 ,000 to 10 , 000 sq.
ft. lots . At one time this area was agricultural mixed
with residential, but now it ke slowly passing to another
condition.:. Such a description would appear to fit the
transitional land use category.
Recommendation - Area #13 designated retail and office commercial and
service and thoroughfare commercial on the General
Plan be Changed to Transitional.
AREA #14 :
Location - East Washington Street , east of the Washington Square
Shopping Center
General Plan - Retail and office commercial
EDP - Special Study Area and office commercial
Zoning - P-C and C-0
Land Use - Dentist offices under construction , proposed medical
offices
Analysis - A portion of this land is already shown as office on the
EDP. The remainder in the study area is discussed later
under changes to the EDP , The Study area involved is
proposed for a medical office complex and the result of
a study Of this portion of the area is that medical office
use is appropriate .
Recommendation - Area #:14 on the General Plan be changed to medical
offices .
AREA #15 :
Location - Haywood Drive between St. Francis Drive '& Perry Lane
General Plan - Medium density (proposed urban density) and retail
and office commercial
EDP - High density (proposed urban high)
-11-
•
Report on Modifications -co the Petaluma Area.. General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
Zoning - R-M-G
Land Use - Developed in garden type apartment units at about 20 units
per acre
Analysis - A change to the proposed urban high designation would more
accurately reflect the existing land use and zoning and
also bring this area into consistency with the EDP. In
addition, this change would reduce the size of the indicated
retail and office commercial shown on the General Plan,
such a reduction also being more consistent with the EDP ,
which shows a smaller neighborhood commercial designation
in this area.,
Recommendation - Change Area #15 to the proposed urban high
designation.
AREA ;#16 :
Location - West side of No. McDowell Blvd. adjacent to Lynch Creek
General Plan - Transitional
EDP - High density residential (proposed urban high)
Zoning - R-1-6 , 500
Land Use - Pasture land
Analysis - This area was designated Transitional because further study
was required to determine if the EDP designation of high
density was appropriate , The purpose behind the designa-
tion of high density areas on the EDP was to achieve a goal
of balancing development types among sections of the City.
While the "Annual Review and Update to the Housing Element"
shows that a big first step has been made towards remedying
the imbalance between the east and the west with regard to
multi-family units , there is still a need for areas designa-
ted high density on the east side , Thus , the designation of
Area #16 is appropriate with regard to Horsing Element goals .
It would appear that this location is appropriate . . It is
within easy walking distance of several important facilities
such as the shopping center , Lucchesi Park and the school .
if medical facilities and/or the hospital were to locate
across McDowell Blvd. , this would add another facility
which might Make this area desirable housing for the elderly
where they would not need transportation to reach stores.,
doctors offices and a park.
The existing zoning would be consistent with the proposed
change as it would represent logical progression to a
higher use of the land.
Staff Recommendation - Change Area #16 from Transitional to the proposed
Urban High .
-12-
c
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
` mental Design Plan. and, the Master-Plan of Zoning, November 13, 1973
Planning Commission Review —There is already a. great deal of high
density designation to the north of this
area.
Planning Commission Recommendation - Area #16 should remain Transitional.
AREA #17 :
Location - Ellis St. , Washington Creek and E. Washington Street
General Plan - Medium density residential (proposed urban density
residential) .
EDP - High density residential
Zoning - R-M-G
Land Use - Vacant land, 2 Or 3 single-family houses , apartments
Analysis - This area is already partially developed with multi-
family units and the. EDP finds this area a logical
location for the further development of multi-family
units in the central area.
Recommendation - Change Area #17 from medium to proposed urban
high.
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PLANS :
The .numbering of these areas starts with #20 in order that numbers 18
and 19 might be reserved for additional suggested modifications to the
General Plan.
AREA #20 :
Location - McDowell Blvd. and proposed Caulfield Lane.
EDP - Office commercial and neighborhood commercial
General Plan - Medium density residential
Zoning - R-1-6 , 500
Land Use - Church , scattered single family houses , vacant land
Analysis - A zoning change for this area to commercial was turned
down by the City Council upon a heavy protest of surround-
ing residents , At that time it was suggested that the
EDE should be modified to reflect the current zoning.
Such °a modification would also bring the EDP into con-
sistency with the General Plan. Since the designation
"Planned Residential was established for undeveloped
and underdeveloped areas , this is the designation which
appears to be most logical .
-13-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ
mental Design Plan and the Master' Plan of Zoning, November 13, 1973
Staff Recommendation That Area #20 be changed from office commercial
and neighborhood commercial to planned
residential..
Planning Commission Recommendation - Change to "Study Area" to await
definite plans .
AREA #21 :
Location - Lakeville Street and Jefferson Street East
EDP - Specific planning area
General Plan - Limited industrial
Zoning - M-L
Land Use - Public uses , some industrial in nature , such as the school
warehouse, or the Continuation High School , strictly a
public use. Older houses located on and around the East
Court area.
Analysis - The entire specific planning area was studied previously
and approved by the Planning Commission for industrial
designation and highway commercial designation. Unfor-
tunately , Area #21 was not described in the resolution ,
so legally the designation was not changed from specific
planning area to industrial even though this was the intent
of the Planning Commission. Therefore , at this time this
area is brought forward again for the proper designation
to he consistent with the industrial of the General Plan
and the M-L zoning.
Recommendation - Change Area #21 from Specific Planning Area to
Industrial designation,
AREA #22 :
Location - McDowell Blvd. & Washington Street
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Medium density residential,
Zoning - p-C & P-U-D
Land Use - Vacant
Analysis - The Special Study Area , which for purposes of this report
has been divided into Area #22 , #2.3, and #24 , was
established by the Planning Commission at the time of the
review and adoption of the EDP. The Planning Commission
first recommended that the future study area be designated
• -14-
Report on Modifications, to the Petaluma Area. General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning, November 13 , 1973
as planned residential , After a hearing , the City Council
recommended that sorie. portion of the area be designated
high density residential use . The Planning Commission
then recommended that the area be made a Special Study
Area, and the Plans were so adopted. In January of 1973 ;
the entire area was zoned P-C-D with a 9 . 1 dwelling unit
per acre overall density for that portion proposed to he
in residential use and 6 . 7 acres for professional-medical
area. Area #22 covers the land proposed to be in residential
use.
Qantas Development Corporation came before the Residential
Development Evaluation Board With. a request for approximately
104 multi-family units for the 1973-74 allotment year , of a
proposed 20? multi-family units and 73 single-family units .
The City Council allocated the 100 multi-family units , the
73 single-family units were not allotted.
In the meantime:, the Planning staff made a study of the
Special Study Area which suggested that the study area was
a prime area for development and would contribute to the
EDP policy of infilling of vacant land. The Planned
Community Development proposed would be an appropriate use
provided that traffic congestion was relieved by providing
bridges across Washington Creek Extension to connect
various streets . The study also noted that the proposed
multi-family units would be situated to act as a buffer
between the commercial and professional activity in the
shopping centers and the single-family residential
activities..
Since that time the developers have requested and received
P-U-D zoning for a portion of the multi-family area and
have submitted Tentative and Final Maps . They also have
a request into the allocation board for the remainder of
the multi-family units and for the single-family units .
The request has dropped to 57 single-family units.
Therefore , it would appear logical that Area #22 , the
portion of the Special Study Area proposed to be developed
to residential uses to a density of 9 . 1 units per acre be
designated on the LDP as medium density residential,
which consists Of a range around 10 units to the acre.
Recommendation - That Area #22 on the EDP he changed from Special Study
Area to medium density residential (proposed urban
density) .
AREA #23 :
Location - McDowell Blvd. & East Washington Street
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Retail and office commercial - suggested change to
medical offices (See Area #14) .
-15-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma. Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
Zoning - P-C-D
Land Use - Vacant
Analysis - This area is part of the Special Study Area discussed under
Area #22. Plans have been submitted proposing the develop-
ment of a. medical office complex for this area. A study
suggested that such medical office uses would be an accept--
able buffer between adjacent proposed residential and the
existing newly built shopping center.
Recommendation - That Area #23 be changed to office designation.
AREA #24 :
Location - McDowell Blvd , & East Washington Street
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Retail and office commercial
Zoning - C-C.
Land Use - Various shops and stores
Analysis - Since this area was placed into special study the
Gashington ,Square Shopping Center has expanded into this
area, building among others , a new Safeway and a Mervyns
department store.
Recommendation - Area #24 should be changed from a Special Study Area
to Community Commercial designation.
AREA #25 :
Location - Portion of the Special Study Area bounded by Lakeville St. ,
East Washington St. and the Petaluma River, fronting on
Washington St .
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - C-H, M-L, proposed change from D^.' L to C-C tabled at this
time
Land Use - Highway oriented "commercial uses , cleared land , few light
industrial uses.
Analysis - See the supplemental report on the entire study area.
Community Commercial designation would appear to fit
possible proposed uses- and proposed zoning and would he
more compatible with adjacent designations .
-16-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
Meintal Design Plan and the Master Plan f, Zoning, November 13 , 1973
Recommendation - Change portion of the Special Study Area as indicated
to Community Commercial designation.
AREA #26:
Location - Portion of the ;Special Study Area bounded by Lakeville
Street, East Washington Street, and the Petaluma River,
which lies north of the portion of the area fronting on
East Washington Street, the apex of the triangle.
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning M-L
Land Use - Light industrial uses
Analysis - See supplemental report on entire study area.
Recommendation - Change portion of the Special Study Area , as
indicated, to Industrial designation.
AREA $27 :
Location - Bounded by Lakeville Street , "D" Street, Erwin Street &
Jefferson Street
EDP - Industrial
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - C-H
Land Use - Cleared' land, proposed veterinarian office, older 5-unit
apartment'
Analysis - This area was recently zoned to Highway Commercial with
submitted plans for a veterinarian office. While adjacent
land to the east is zoned M..L and C-N, the land use is
residential and commercial uses . The service or highway
commercial may serve as a buffer between industrial uses
to the west -and these residential uses . The area is along
a Major roadway, thus 'highway oriented. The lots are
small to attract industrial uses , but most of the vacant
lots are not too small to attract highway oriented commer-
cial uses such as the proposed veterinarian office.
Recommendation - Change the Industrial designation on the EDP to
Service Commercial .
-17-
•
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning, November 13 , 1973
AREA #28 :
Location - Area fronting on Wilson Street approximately between
Washington Street and intersection of Wilson and "D" Streets .
EDP - Urban low density residential
General Plan = Central Urban
Zoning - C-N generally; one or two lots M-L
Land Use - Older residential uses ; commercial uses
Analysis - At the time that the Master Plan of Zoning was updated in
order that it might reflect the Zoning Ordinance , a citizens
meeting was held for the area zoned R-C to the east and for
this area zoned C-N. Since there are many residential uses
in this area, inquiry was. Made by the Planning staff as to
whether the property owners wished this area to remain zoned
C-N or rezoned to R-C. As far .as could be determined from
the persons responding , they requested that the zoning remain
C-N, Neighborhood Commercial . There are a number of commercia
uses located in this area, including a small grocery, a servic
station , a plant nursery and a beauty .shop. The residences
are older and many are adjacent to heavy commercial or indus-
trial uses located on Washington Street and Lakeville Street.
Wilson Street is a connector between the heavily traveled
Washington and "D" Streets, so may well not be a desirable
location for new residential uses when the existing residentia
uses are phased out. Many of the lots are substandard in
size for new .single-family residential uses and would have to
be combined for new residential or commercial uses ,
In order that the EDP and the Zoning Map .be consistent, either
the EDP designation will have to be changed or the zoning
will have to be changed. It would appear that the more
logical development in this area. is toward neighborhood type
of commercial uses serving the adjacent P:-C District.
Recommendation - Change Area 428 from Urban Low Density to Neighborhood
Commercial.
AREA #29 :
Location - Fronting on "D" Street between the Petaluma River & 2nd Street
EDP - Service Commercial
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - M-L
Land Use - Industrial (Grain Mills)
-18-
•
•
Report on Modifications to. the Petaluma Area General Plan , the Environs
mental Design Plan and the Master plan of Zoning', November 13 , 1973
Analysis - At the time that the Master Plan of Zoning was updated, to
reflect the Zoning Ordinance , this area was zoned
The former zoning was C-S , Which was eliminated from our
new Zoning Ordinance . Areas so zoned were changed to
either C-H or r?-t, as determined by land use . This small
area was determined to properly fall in the Light
Industrial Zoning District after meetings with property
owners and a careful study of uses in the area. However,
the EDP still reflects the previous zoning and the problem
of consistency must be dealt with. Since all earlier
studies showed that the present zoning is appropriate , it
would appear logical to change the EDP .
Recommendation - Change Area ' 29 from Ser+rice Commercial to Industrial
designation.
AREA #30 :
Location - " I" Street , Petaluma Blvd. So. & Mountain View Avenue
EDP - Medium density residential (proposed urban density residential)
General Plan - Central urban and medium density residential
(proposed urban density residential)
Zoning - C-E , C-N and R-1-6 , 500
Land Use - Along Petaluma Blvd. - commercial uses such as car repair ,
furniture store and real estate office ; older single-
family houses, and several lame vacant lots . Along "I"
Street, Fifth Street and Mountain View Avenue the houses
are generally nearer and well maintained. There are no
commercial uses , "K" Street deadends into the interior
of this large block and provides access for several large
lots ,
Analysis - The designation on the EDP is not consistent with the
commerciai zoning fronting on Petaluma Blvd. At the time
the EDP was formulated there were several tentative
residential development proposals for the large vacant
lots. However ; nothi
.
Report on Modifications tb the Petaluma Area General Plan , the Fnviron-
merita:i. .DeSign Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
i?eeammendation - Designate the strip of Ares-+- #31 along Petaluma.
Blvd. from EDP medium density La ;service commercial.
Designate the interior portion of Area #30 as urban
low density residential to corresnond with the
•
existing urban low designation along Fifth Street ,
AREA #3l ;
Location - Petaluma. Blvd . South
EDP - High density residential (proposed urban high)
• General Plan -- Central Urban
Zoning -- C-H
Land Use - Several commercial uses , vacant land
Analysis - The designated high density for this relatively small
area needs careful consideration as it is bounded on two
sides by commercial and industrial uses and the this d side
by the river . Traffic problems also need to be considered
with regard to a high density use at this location . it
would appear more logical that this area be designated
service commercial to correspond to the existing land use
and the zoning , However, there is presently a development
proposal for condominiums for a. portion of this area and
for the adjacent land which is designated nark . A change
in designation from high density to service commercial may
well affect consideration of the proposed condominium
development, This proposed development must of course be
considered in terms of the park designation, proper river
development and traffic problems , as well as the designation
of Area #31 , in view of the necessary studies that will
he undertaken shortly , it may be best to designate this
smaller area as a Special Study Area pending further study
of the development proposal , traffic patterns and river
development. .
Recommendation - Designate Area #F31 as a Special Study Area .
AREA n32 :
Location - Sixth and "D" Streets
EDP - High density residential (Proposed urban high)
• General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - R r sC-omnact Single-Family Residence) District and C-C
(Administrative and ProteSSi.anal Office) District
--20.-
I^
m.
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area. General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning, November 1-3 , 1973
Land USe - Duplexes and older single-family houses , an office and
apartments
Analysis - This area is designated for high density on the EDP;
however, several factors will either deter the development
of high density units in this small area or make such
development undesirable . The area abuts single-family
residential areas , causing an abrupt transition between
the urban low density and the high density and the lots
are small for high density development. All the lots
are developed mostly in single-family construction.
While the houses are of older construction, most of them
have been maintained in good. condition. A number of the
houses have historical value and the area should be
encouraged to retain the period architecture rather than
endourage a shift to high rise apartments . The present
R-C zoning does not fit high density residential.
The criteria used for the high density designation was
the need in Petaluma for higher density areas , especially
adjacent to the downtown.. Some of the lots could be
developed in small apartment buildings without disturbing
the historical nature of the area. Therefore , it is
proposed that the change in designation be to medium
density (proposed urban density) which would uphold the
policy of the EDP, yet be more consistent with present
zoning and land use .
Recommendation - Change .Area #32 to medium density residential
(proposed urban density residential) .
AREA #33 :
Location - Sixth Street, Howard Street , Western Street & Washington
Street
EDP - Office
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - C-C1- C-0, and R-C
Land Use - Commercial uses , offices and residential uses
Analysis - Area $33 was studied to determine if the office designation
was appropriate for this'area and consistent with the
zoning: map. It would appear to he consistent as office
uses are permitted in the C-C District . In addition, it
may he logical progression that many of the older residential
uses in the C--C zone will be removed and replaced b_v office
uses.
Recommendation - No change in the office designation .
-21-
•
Report on, Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of, Zoning , November 13, 1973
AREA #34 :
Location - Western, Upham and English Streets
EDP - Industrial
General Plan - Central Urban •
Zoning - C-H, R-C
Land Use - Creamery
Analysis - When the Master Plan of Zoning was modified to bring it
into conformity with the newly adopted Zoning Ordinance ,
Area #34 was changed from the Special Industrial zone which
no longer exists to C-H (Highway Commercial) . This zone
under the new ordinance allows for. creameries . The
proposed change to the EDP would simply reflect the recent '
change in zoning.
Recommendation - Change Area #34 from Industrial to Service Commercial.
AREA #35 :
Location - "I" Street & Sunnyslope Road
EDP - Special Study Area
General Plan - Medium density residential
Zoning __ P-U-D & P-C-D
Land Use - Pasture land, proposed for subdivisions ; 200 units
allocation received
Analysis - See supplemental report.
Recommendation -See supplemental report.
AREA #36 ;
Location - Petaluma Blvd . North , Kent Street , Oak Street
EDP - High density residential (proposed urban high)
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - C-H (Highway Commercial)
Land Use - Commercial and highway oriented commercial fused car
sales , muffler shop) one small older apartment house ,
two older. houses
-22-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Pzea General Plan , the Environ-
mental 'Design Plan and the Master Plan Of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
Analysis - The EDP designated this area high density residential as
part of the pelicv to strengthen the downtown by providing
a larger market Within walking distance. In addition,
the Housing Element stresses the need for a better balance
between the number of single-family and multi-family units
within the City . Unfortunately, in the selection of this
area, no in-depth study was made of zoning , land use and
traffic patterns to insure that this area is appropriate
for high density residential or indeed for any residential
use. The zoning is C-H, therefore , the Zoning Ordinance
and the EDP are not consistent with each other, A careful
study was made of the area and revealed two factors which
would appear to indicate that commercial designation is
more appropriate for the area than residential . These
factors are the seemingly healthy commercial activities in
the area (such as a service station and repair garage , a
retail bakery and used car sales) and the relatively high
noise level along the Boulevard. Thus , it would seem that
it is more appropriate to change the EDP to be consistent
with the commercial zoning rather than the reverse . However ,
such a change, will weaken a policy of the EDP, and this is
the second high density area which will have been changed.,
(See Area 432 . 7
In addition., many of these same circumstances apply to
Area #37 , meaning perhaps a further loss of high density
residential . Therefore , another area possibly suitable for
high density residential was researched to maintain. the
policy of reinforcing the downtown. The suggested area
is directly adjacent to and to the west of Area #36 . The
area is presently zoned ,R-M-(3 , and the land use consists
of older single-family houses , newer duplexes and small
apartments.. An apartment of 13 units is located at Oak
and Keller Streets . Most of the recent construction has
been multi-family and it can be expected that as some of
the older houses are amortized out they might logically
be replaced with multi -family units . The area has the
advantage of being one lot depth away from Petaluma Blvd.
North, thus easing_ the traffic noise while still providing
close access to a collector street.. The reason why another
area in closest to downtown along Kentucky and Keller Streets
has been proposed to remain in medium density is that the
older houses in this area are generally larger., better
kept up, and of greater historical. value . This area
adjacent to doWntotan may best he left in medium density
so as to encourage the: retaining of these old homes which
illustrate. Petaluma ' s cultural heritage .
Recommendation - Change Area #36, one lot depth along Petaluma Blvd .
North, to Commercial designation. Change the area
adjacent and to the west along Keller and {tenruckv
Streets south from urban low density designation to
high density residential as shown on the map.
-23-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
AREA $37 :
Location - Petaluma Blvd. North, Washington Street, Petaluma River
EDP - High density residential (Proposed Urban High)
General Plan - Central Urban
•
Zoning - C-H (Highway Commerical) , M-L (Light Industrial)
Land Use - Commercial and highway oriented commercial (furniture
store , auto parts , body shop, hardware store , etc. ) ,
industrial
Analysis - As discussed in the analysis of Area #36 , this area was
designated high density residential to strengthen the
Downtown . It was designed with the idea that the
residential would be adjacent to a park fronting on the
river. However, this area is zoned commercial and
industrial , in commercial and industrial uses , and the
noise and traffic level on Petaluma Blvd . would appear to
critically lessen the desirability of the area for resi-
dential use. Designating this area commercial would not
necessarily diminish the possibilities for the park along
the river. A riverside park with small shops and restau-
rants adjacent can he as attractive as a park bounded by
residential uses . Such a park can definitely enhance a
shopping area. The loss of the high density residential
is partially replaced by the suggested designation of a
high density area as discussed with regard to Area #h36 .
The industrial zoned section which is part of Area #37
is relatively small, therefore it is not suggested that
the industrial designation be included.
Staff Recommendation —That Area #37 be changed to Commercial designa-
tion.
Planning Commission Review - Further study needs to be made before
removing this residential designation.
Planning Commission Recommendation - That Area 037 be changed to
Special Study Area.
AREA #38 :
Location - Magnolia Boulevard
EDP - Urban low density residential
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - R-M-G
-24-
Report on Modifications to the Petaluma Area General Plan, the Environ-
mental Design Plan and the Master Plan of Zoning , November 13 , 1973
•
Land Use - Mostly vacant, several single-family houses . Proposed.
apartment complex for vacant land.
Analysis - The proposed change in the EDP is designed to conform to
the existing zoning and the proposed use of the land.
Recommendation - Change Area #38 to medium density (proposed urban
density) residential.
AREA $39 :
Location - Bounded by Petaluma River, .railroad track and boundary of
Linda del Mar Subdivision
EDP - Medium density residential
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning - M-L Light Industrial)
Land Use - 4 or 5 single-family residences , a trucking firm and a
day nursery,
Analysis - The existing industrial zoning is a historically
established zone and appropriate at this time considering
the railroad tracks and the largest present use on the
land, the trucking firm. The existing inconsistency
between the zoning and the EDP can be remedied by chang-
ing the EDP. designation to planned residential.. Under
this designation, until the City receives a definite plan
for the area, rezoning should not be initiated. The
existing zoning can be considered historical and consistent
zoning, pending development plans . Moreover, planned resi-
dential does not preclude other than residential uses . A
plan for the area might include non-residential uses as a
buffer strip along .the railroad and residential uses in
the area adjacent to the Linda del Mar Subdivision..
Recommendation - Change Area #39 to Planned Residential.
AREA 440 :
Location - Bodega Avenue and Lohrman Lane - Straubville
EDP - Agricultural/Open Space
General Plan - Retail and office commercial , service and thoroughfare
commercial
•
Zoning - County - "General Commercial" District
-25-
Repot on Modifications-.cations to the Petaluma Area GGene.ra:. Plan , the En ,_ °.-.
mental Design Plan r<ri the Master 1".Lan Of Zoning , November 13 , 1973 ..
Analysis This area was discussed under. Area 41_1', in changes to the
General Plan, he proposed change was to Transitional to
depict the t aCt that the area 1.s slowly passing from one
contlit“rn to a o—hcr, In order that uhe t'. o documents he
consistent , I .t is proposed that this area be putt into a
Special Study Area. Such a designation will also allow
tor: further study of the changing condition .
Recommendation - Change Area 4410 to a Special Stuffy Area,
AREA 441 :
Location - Petaluma River , Lakeville Street, Madison Street
EDP - Service Commercial, medium density -residential
General Plan - Central Urban
Zoning -- M-L ^,Light Industrial)
Land Use - rood processing plant., older house
Analysis - This area is zoned Industrial and the building site was just
recently renovated for a food processing plant which appears
to he an active operation,
Recommendation - Area 441 be changed to Industrial,
AREA 442 :
Location - West of H1ticrest Hospital
EDP -- Park , Agricultural/Open Space , Planned Residential
General Plan - Park , low and medium density residential
Zoning -- County "A" , Agricultural ; A-E., Exclusive Agriculture;
R-1-6 , 500
Land Use Open n l ind , several farm houses
Anal i,s - This area has been discussed with regard to the designation
of _ La' .ax park :rn the western hilts under Area ±J.I It
.7 s sufficient to sa`✓ that such a park, ,should also he indi-
cated on the EDP to insure that the two documents are con-
sistent and that both these sensitive areas are protected .
Recommendation - That the park location be expanded to cover approxi-
mately the same area as shown in Areas 411 and 442 ,
Respectfully submitted .
Charlotte Teep:i.e4
Associate Planner
CT : sd
-26 -