HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 07/13/2004 Planning Commission Minutes - July 13, 2004 .
- A L v City of Petaluma, California
Ati City Council Chambers
'/.2, ,,,,l_ t'' City Hall, 11 English Street
l 11 ,, Petaluma, CA 94952
Telephone 707/778-4301 /Fax 707/778-4498 •
�j 8 5$ E-Mail planning(wci.petaiuma.ea.us
Web Page http://www:ci.petaluma.ca.us
1
2 Planning Commission Minutes
3 July13, 2004 - 7:00 PM
4
5 Commissioners: Present; Asselmeier, Dargie*, Harris; McAllister, Rose, von Raesfeld
6 Absent: Barrett
7 * Chair
8
9 Staff: George White, Assistant Director, Community Development
10 Tiffany Robbe, Associate Planner
11 Anne Windsor, Administrative Secretary
12
13 •
14 ROLL CALL:
15 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of June 8, 2004 were approved as presented.
16 MIS Harris/Rose, 5-0, Asselmeier abstained, Barrett absent.
17 PUBLIC COMMENT: None
18 DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None
19 COMMISSIONER'S REPORT: None
20 CORRESPONDENCE: None •
21 APPEAL STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
22 LEGAL RECOURSE STATEMENT: Was noted on the agenda.
23
24
25 Public hearing began: @ 7:00
26
27 PUBLIC HEARING:
28 NEW BUSINESS:
29
30 I. WILEY AND BLUE APPEALS, 3 Ricci Court
31 AP No.: 006-181-012
32 File: 04-APL-0244 and 03-TPM-0344
33 Planner: Tiffany Robbe
34
35 Appeals of the administrative approval of the Wiley Tentative Parcel Map located
36 at 3 Ricci Court.
Planning Commission Minutes - July 13, 2004
2 Tiffany.Robbe presented the staff report.
3
. 4 Craig Spaulding: Responded to Commissioner's questions regarding'parking on,Ricci
5 Court and explained that with Condition of approval 15 the intersection would look
6 similar to a driveway approach. . '
7
8 Lon Wiley, 3 Ricci Court: Reviewed the history of his application for the tentative map
• ' 9 . and the conditions appealed. Asks to remove trees 1, 4, and 8.
10
11 John Meserve, Consulting Arborist: Verified.that,no damage to on-site trees has occurred
12 since this last arborist report and is available for questions. Pine 1 is healthy now, but
13 likely to become a hazard. Oaks 4 & 8 are both nice healthy trees. 8 leans, but this is
14 only an aesthetic issue. Oak 12 will eventually fail.
15
16 Steven LaFranchi, Engineer: Reiterated the reasons for appealing the engineering
17 conditions 15 and 16.
18 •
19 Linda Blue, 4 Ricci Court: Provided a history of the Blue appeal asking that `no
20 parking" signs not be posted on Ricci Court and that trees 11 and 12 (a live oak and
21 redwood) be preserved. Doesn't want to view two 3-car garages from her property
22 instead of the century oaks she sees now. Needs nearby on-street parking.
23
24 Public hearing opened:
25
26 Jim O'Brien, 534 Amber Way: Border Mr. Wiley on the north side and in.favor of
27 the parcel map and the removal of trees 1, 4 and 8. Stated that Mr. Wiley has not cut
28 down trees and has done nothing but improve the property since he moved,in a year ago.
29 Believes project will be a benefit to the neighborhood. Read a letter from;Donna,Epping
30 at 526 Laurel Street in favor of the projectand'supportingremoval of trees 1, 4 and.8.
31
32 Tim Woelbing, 541 Laurel Street: Believes the lot in question can.support-two homes,
33 however, wants as many trees preserved as possible. No one ever told him there was no
34 parking on Ricci. Main concern is drainage,from.Amber Way and Ricci Court properties.
35
36 Public hearing closed:
37
38 Committee comments/Issues identified:
39
40 Wiley Appeal:
41 • Trees removed/retained, preservation conditions
42 • Sidewalk/driveway at Ricci/Laurel intersection
43 • Manhole Cover
44
45 Blue Appeal:
46 • Removal of trees 11 and 12 (lot 2)
47 • No Parking signs on Ricci Court
2
Planning Commission Minutes - July 13, 2004
2
3 Trees removed/retained, mitigation measures:
• 4
5 Commissioner McAllister: Support removal of stone pine 1; want to discuss saving at
6 least tree 4 or 8; leaning toward saving tree 4. Not willing to sacrifice trees for larger
7 garage.
8
9 Commissioner von Raesfeld: This is a balancing act. Cannot isolate tree issue from site
10 design.
11
12 Commissioner Asselmeier: Support removal of tree 1 in favor of planting other trees to
13 shield a new garage from the neighbors. In favor of preserving as many trees as possible.
14
15 Commissioner Rose: Support removal of tree 1, if we decide to preserve trees 4 and 8
16 there are still ways to develop the site adequately.
17
18 Council Member Harris: Believe Mr. Wiley should do want he wants with his property.
19 Agree tree 1 is ok to be removed. Not opposed to removing trees 4 and 8.
20
21 Chair Dargie: Fine with removing tree 1, want further discussion of frees 4 and 8.
22
23 Commissioner von Raesfled: Leave preservation conditions as written. Planning
24 Commission consistently discourages garage-dominated architecture. Can put a 2-car
25 garage on lot 2 near the existing garage to be removed, built a 3,000 sq. ft. one-story
26 house, and still preserve trees 4, 7, and 8.
27
28 Commissioner Asselmeier: Believe these large detached garages near the front of lots
29 would not be favorable to the neighborhood. Want to save more trees and give the
30 appellant the ability for an equitable return on his property and do right by the
31 neighborhood as well. Likes von Raesfled's concept.
32
33 Commissioner Rose: Accepts recommendations from staff that trees 11 and 12 be
34 removed and that the merits of these two trees are less than others on the site. Believe it
35 is sensible to remove trees 11 and 12 to provide a buildable area and retain trees 4 and 8.
36
37 Chair Dargie: Sensible to remove trees 11 and 12, am not for building in drip line of 3, 5,
38 6 and 9. I might be amenable to tree 8 being removed. 4 should be preserved. Do not
39 think 3-car garage at front of lot is consistent with neighborhood.
40
41 Commissioner McAllister: Ok with trees 11 and 12 being removed. If 4 and 8 can be
42 saved, that would be best.
43
44 Chair Dargie: If tree 8 is removed and drip line of 9 is respected, would provide a large
45 building envelope.
46
3
Planning Commission Minutes - July 13,2004
1 Commissioner von Raesfeld: Assumed trees 11 and 12 would be removed, however, I
2 would try to save all the other trees: Do not think the applicant will suffer if trees 4 and 8
3 are preserved.
4
5 Commissioner Asselmeier: Agree to remove trees 11 and 12 and preserve trees 4=and 8.
6 Ok, with small encroachments into dripline of 4 & 8 with arborist's ok.
7
8 John Meserve: Construction occurring all the time in drip line; with conditions and
9 mitigations,in place you can build and save trees at the same time Key is to not damage
10 root system; need ground and root protection from compaction & cuts.
11
12 Commissioner McAllister: I am concerned about the 3'-car garage.on lot;I and_pavement
13 encroaching on the drip line of free#2. I believe,driveway would encroach less if it were
14 a 2-car garage.
15
16 John Merserve: Interlocking pavers would not harm the tree more than existing'condition.
17
18 Commissioner von Raesfeld: I believe there is some logic to reducing the 3-car garage
19 on lot 1. A front garage setback of 15 feet would be better.
20
21 Commissioner Rose: I believe we are treading into the design of the}property. Agree
22 conceptually to provide avenues for the appellant to develop parcel 2. Do not feel.
23 comfortable discussing pavers encroaching on tree 2.
24
25 Chair Dargie: Agree with Commissioner Rose.
26
27 Commissioner Asselmeier: I do have concerns about a freestanding 3-car garage.
28 Support no construction under dripline of trees 2 or 16.
29
30 Chair Dargie: We can uphold staff's condition regarding protection in the drip line of
31 trees 2 and 16.
32
33 Commissioner McAllister: Support staff's condition on lot 1.regarding-drip lines.
34 -
35 Commission Consensus regarding trees:
36 • T1 removed
37 • T4 and T8 preserved, however construction within drip line whe re:arboristiok and
38 mitigation
39 • -
40 Sidewalk/driveway on Ricci Court:
41
42 Commissioner McAllister: It is difficult to see why this condition is important — 'is a
43 sidewalk to nowhere.
44
45 Council Member Harris: Do not agree with this condition.
46
47 Commissioner Asselmeier: Agree with the City Engineer on this.
4
Planning Commission Minutes - July 13, 2004
2 Commissioner Rose: Understand what the City engineer asking, do not think driveway
3 improvement is appropriate for an intersection. I sense it will be confusing.
4
5 Commissioner 'von Raesfeld: Agree with Commissioner Asselmeier and the City
6 Engineer.
7
8 Chair Dargie: Am not clear what the end result would be, so I would rather leave
9 intersection as is.
10
11 Commission consensus to:
12 • Eliminate condition 15
13
14 Manhole cover:
15
16 Commission consensus to:
17 • Retain condition 16
1S
19 Blue Appeal:
20 • No parking signs on Ricci Court
21 • Retaining trees 11 and 12
22
23 Council Member Harris: What can we do to address the Blue's concern?
24
25 Craig Spaulding: Without widening Ricci to the full 27-foot public right-of-way, there is
26 nothing you can do.
27
28 Commissioner von Raesfeld: Municipal code says no parking on 20' road; we can't
29 change the Muni Code.
30
31 Commissioner Asselmeier: We don't have ability to allow parking within 20 feet -
32 maybe Blues could turn the 7 feet of right-of-way they use as their front yard into parking
33 spaces. We can't condition Wiley's to do this improvement.
34
35 Commission Consensus:
36 • Cannot allow parking on.20' Ricci
37 • Trees 11 and 12 can be removed
38
39 Commission consensus-Wiley Appeal
40
41 • Ti can be removed.
42 • T4 and 8 must be preserved, construction can happen in drip line of T 4 & 8 with
43 approval of licensed arborist and the adoption of arborist's mitigation.
44 • Maintain other tree preservation conditions
45 • Eliminate condition 15 (driveway/sidewalk) •
46 • Maintain condition 16 (manhole)
5
Planning Commission Minutes - July 13, 2004
1
2 Commission consensus-Blue Appeal
3 • Deny the appeal
4
5 MIS von Raesfeld/Rose to deny Blue appeal and uphold in part 'and deny,in part the
6 Wiley appeal as discussed above.
7
8
9
10
11 III. LIAISON REPORTS: -
12
13 a. City Council: Council discussed a cross town connector and have .
14 identified a north and south location; Council meets tomorrow night
15 discussing PCDC and capital improvements.
16 b. SPARC: None
17 c. Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee: Provided comments on
18 Southgate and Dutra-property and looking at revising the:Bike.Plan as part
19 of the General Plan update
20 d. Tree Advisory Committee: None
21
22
23 Adjournment: 9:25
24
25
26
27 S:\PC-Planning Commission\Minutes\PC Minutes 04\071304.doc
6