Month 1988.10 October.
Day 1988.10.18PC
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
City of Vacaville
7:30 P.M. - City Council Chambers October
18, 1988
CALL TO ORDER:
The regular meeting of the City Planning Commission was called to order at 7:30 P.M.
by Chairman Matsuhara.
PRESENT: Chairman
Matsuhara, Vice Chairman Gjervold-Mikalis,
Commissioner
Alpert, Commissioner McCulley, Commissioner
McEntee,
Commissioner Rajander, Commissioner Weiss
ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Director Werner, Senior Planner
Moore, Associate Planner
Buderi, Assistant Planner Shields, Associate Civil Engineer Erwin
COMMUNICATIONS:
- Petition in opposition to the Nut Tree Court Medical Building appeal.
- Exhibits for Meadowhawk Subdivision Unit 4.
MISCELLANEOUS:
None
1. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Approval of Minutes - October 4, 1988
Commissioner McEntee requested a correction on Item #3 of the minutes.
Chairman Matsuhara moved, Rajander seconded, to approve the minutes as
amended. Motion approved 7-0.
2. NUT TREE COURT MEDICAL BUILDING - Gary E. Stein, applicant
a. Environmental Assessment (REA-55-88)
b. Appeal of Design Review (DR-51-88)
c. Variance (V-6-88)
Pertains to an appeal of the Design Review Committee's denial of Design Review
(DR-51-88) for a medical clinic/office building on a 1.5 acre parcel located on Nut Tree
Road, west of Nut tree Court. The Design Review Committee's denial was based upon
a determination that the building's mass and height were out of scale with its
surroundings. The project includes a request for a 1.5' variance from the 30' height
limit in a Professional Administrative Office Zoning District. The proposed building
would have 3 stories, not including the roof top enclosure for mechanical equipment,
with approximately 26,000 sq. ft. of building area.
The proposal includes a request to reaffirm the previous environmental assessment
consisting of the I-505/I-80 Redevelopment EIR.
Senior Planner Moore reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the
record, noting that the City Council had, in a previous appeal, directed approval of a
three-story building with a maximum building height of 31.5 feet, which is 1.5 feet
above the maximum height limit standard for the zone district. The applicant had made
some design changes in the building and requested that the variance be approved for a
31.6' building. Staff recommended approval of the appeal.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Harry Schneider, project manager, said the exterior design of the building had
been
improved and would fit in very well. He said the applicant accepted all conditions of
approval.
Brian Johnston, said that they would buffer the site with a 5' berm and landscaping;
take off the roof screens and use low profile roof units. He said the units would not
show when placed in the center of the building.
Eleanor Johanson, 179 Woodstock Circle, said she objected to a three-story building
next to homes that are all one-story, and objected to the variance for the additional 1
1/2 feet. She presented a petition and said that she spoke for all the people whose
signature was on the petition.
Resident of 161 Woodstock Circle, said it is a nice building, but should be
a two-story building. Compared to the homes in Sterling Wood, it is massive, and the
variance will open the door to other buildings of additional height.
Bill East of Leisure Town and Ernie Nigrie of Sterling Homes were both in favor
of
the building and additional medical facilities in the area.
Dr. Stein said they would have special services available that could not be
provided
for in a two-story building. He said they tried to make the building compat-ible to the
neighborhood, and that it would be no problem to the neighborhood. It is not a high
volume business. Marie Adams said she uses Nut Tree Road often, and that the
convalescent hospital
in the area is not noticable from Nut tree Road. She hoped that this building would be
screened as well.
Sherry Sutton, Sterling Wood resident, said that Mr. Stein had called them about
the
traffic. She said they were not concerned about the traffic, but that the building would
tower over their homes.
The public hearing was closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Rajander said that it probably would not be a problem when it is
built;
it would be hard to tell if it is 30' or 31 1/12' high.
Commissioner McCulley agreed with Commissioner Rajander, and said that he felt
the buildings in this "complex" should all tie in together in design. He was in favor
of
the original design and tile roof.
Chairman Matsuhara said that he understood the neighbor's feelings, but that
this
area was planned before the Sterling Homes. It is a previously approved project and
just needs an extension. The building is consistent with the General Plan and zoning
for the area, and he was in favor of the project. He did not think the project is low
profile, or that it needs to blend in with the residential area, it is in a professional zone.
He was in favor of the new design.
Commissioner Alpert agreed with the appeal, but had a problem with the variance
for
additional height.
Commissioner Gjervold-Mikalis agreed with McCulley, and said that she also felt
the
tile roof would fit in better with the neighborhood, the existing Stein medical building
and the convalescent center.
Commissioner Weiss said that he agreed that the three-story building would stand
out, but felt that the general appearance of the building should be softened with the tile
roof, colors and landscaping.
The Commission voted 4-3 in favor of the metal roof.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Environmental Assessment:
Commissioner McEntee moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve REA-55-88,
reaffirming the previously approved I-505/I-80 Redevelopment EIR (EIR-2-84) as
adequately addressing the impacts of the project in accordance with the provisions of
CEQA and findings A-C as listed in staff report. Motion approved 7-0.
Design Review:
Commissioner McEntee moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve the Appeal of
the Design Review Committee's denial of Design Review (DR-51-88) approving the
project subject to conditions A-K as listed in the staff report. Motion approved 6-1 (No:
McCulley).
Variance:
Commissioner McEntee moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve the Variance
(V-6-88) to allow a 1' 6" increase in building height above the 30 foot height limit
established in Section 17.27.110 for the Professional Administrative Office District
based upon the five required findings as discussed in the staff report and subject to
conditions A and B of staff report. Motion approved 6-1 (No: McCulley).
Chairman Matsuhara called a recess at 8:50. The meeting was recalled to order at
9:05 p.m.
3. MEADOWHAWK UNIT NO. 4 - Reynen Bardis and Winn, applicant
a. Environmental Assessment (REA-62-88)
b. Tentative Subdivision Map (TM-8-88)
Pertains to a request for an 81 lot single family subdivision within the
Gonsalves-Lockie Policy Plan Area. The proposed development is zoned R-1-Variable
(PD). The current proposal is a revision to a previously approved map. The
proposed lot sizes range from 4,3000 square feet to 8,300 square feet. The request
includes reaffirmation of the previous environmental assessment consisting of the
South Central Sector EIR (EIR-1-83).
Chairman Matsuhara declared a possible conflict of interest and stepped down.
Associate Planner Buderi reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the
record, noting that the 81 single-family project meets the requirements and standards
of the Gonsalves-Lockie Development Agreement and Policy Plan, which guarantees a
developer the right to build, meeting the criteria set forth, unless a growth management
system is in effect. Staff recommended approval of the project.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Steve Hicks, representing the developer, said that this is the 4th and final
unit of this
subdivision. He said they concurred with recommendations for staff conditions.
Public hearing closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Weiss said that he did not feel comfortable with allowing the
construction of homes according to the Policy Plan and Agreement, without seeing the
plans. He felt they should slow the growth, and would vote against it.
Commissioner Alpert said the Development Agreement and Policy Plan was a well
thought out document, no changes were needed; it was approved by the Commission
and City Council for development. He was in favor of the tentative map.
Commissioner McCulley said that he agreed with Commissioner Alpert and would
approve the project.
Commissioner Rajander agreed with Alpert and McCulley, but would like to see
the
plans for homes.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Environmental Assessment:
Commissioner Rajander moved, McEntee seconded, to approve Environmental
Assessment (REA-62-88) regarding the proposed project, reaffirming the South Central
Sector EIR in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and with findings A, B, and C of
staff report. Motion approved 6-0-1 (Abstaining: Matsuhara).
Tentative Map:
Commissioner Rajander moved, McEntee seconded, to approve Tentative Map (TM-8-88) for the 81 residential
lots, subject to Mandatory Findings (a-g) and the findings of
Overriding Considerations of Attachment "A", and conditions of approval A-N as
amended:
J. Deleted
K. That typical house plottings be submitted for lots 23, 24, 32 and 33
to ensure that
houses will fit on the lots with the required 50 foot setback from face of curb. ...
N. That if an amendment to the Gonsalves-Lockie Policy Plan is approved
to
eliminate the pedestrian bridge over the Putah South
Canal as shown in
Meadowhawk Unit 1, the developer shall increase the
width of ten lots in this
development through the appropriate subdivision process.
Motion approved 5-1-1 (No: Weiss, Abstaining: Matsuhara)
4. ALAMO RETAIL CENTER - IFC Construction, applicant
a. Environmental Assessment (REA-52-88)
b. Conditional Use Permit (CUP-9-88)
c. Variance (V-7-88)
Pertains to a request for retail center with approximately 32,400 square feet
at the
corner of Alamo Drive and Alamo Lane. The property is a 5.5 acre parcel, zoned C-G.
The proposal includes five buildings to be constructed in four phases with 158 parking
spaces. The applicant is requesting a variance from the 10 foot landscaping
requirement along 85 feet of the east property line, where the property adjoins a
residentially designated property. The applicant is requesting reaffirmation of the
previous environmental assessment consisting of a Negative Declaration (EA-19-87).
Assistant Planner Shields reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the
record, noting that the site is proposed to be phased, however a master plan was
submitted consistent with the General Plan amendment that required the site be
developed as a coordinated commercial center. A 6 ft. high decorative masonry wall
was required along the east property line adjacent to the property zoned residential.
The applicant requested a variance to eliminate landscaping along the masonry wall
east of building C, and reduce the landscaping along the shared property line to the
north. Staff felt that this type of center would not have the same amount of traffic as a
large center anchored by a higher use such as a supermarket/drug store.
Staff recommended approval of the project subject to conditions as listed in staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Chip Gallagher, representing IFC Construction, spoke in favor of the project
and
discussed traffic, street improvements, parking reduction and landscaping.
Gregg Faulkner, architect, discussed the building materials and colors.
Marie Adams, 1172 Creekside Court, was concerned about the traffic at the
intersection of Alamo Lane and Alamo Drive. She felt that a convenience market with
gas and a Deli would cause a major traffic problem, in addition to the traffic from the
ball park and the Creekside Subdivision. She felt a stacking lane for two cars would
not be adequate. She also noted that Alamo Lane is the ingress and egress for the El
Matador Mobile Home Park and the existing convenience market. She felt that a right
turn only should be permitted.
Public hearing closed.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Rajander agreed with Mrs. Adams on the traffic. He felt a
contractor
service business would not be a problem, but a convenience market/gas station would
create a major problem. He also felt that Pad E would be a problem.
Commissioner McCulley said that except for Pad E, the rest of the project is
the best
we could expect for the site.
Commissioner Gjervold-Mikalis said that with the construction of Pad E, traffic
should
be limited to right turns only.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Environmental Assessment:
Commissioner McCulley moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve REA-52-88,
reaffirming Negative Declaration EA-19-87 as adequately addressing the impacts of the
project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, based on findings
A. and B. as listed in staff report. Motion approved 5-2. (No: McEntee and
Rajander)
Conditional Use Permit:
Commissioner McCulley moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve CUP-9-88 as
meeting the required findings under Section 17.4.070 of the Zoning Ordinance and
Section 17.36.020 regarding a five percent reduction in the parking requirement, and
subject to conditions A-O, correcting A, and amending J and M as follows:
A. Correction: Public Works Memo #387
J. Outdoor storage/sales area is limited to the 20 foot wide area at the
rear of
building C and D. This area shall be screened from public view with a decorative
masonry wall to match the building. The design of the gates shall be subject to review
and approval by the City Planner.
M. The on-site circulation shall be revised to provide adequate on-site
stacking for a
minimum of two cars. The location of curb cuts shall be consistent with the site plan as
shown on the civil drawings. This may result in the slight modification of the building
pad location for buildings A and B and in the location of parking spaces near these
entrances.
Motion approved 5-2. (No: McEntee and Rajander)
Variance:
Commissioner McCulley moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve the Variance
(V-7-88) reducing the required landscaping along the south and east property line
based on the five required findings as presented in the staff report, and subject to
conditions A and B of staff report. Motion approved 6-0.
5. REGENCY PLACE SUBDIVISION
The applicants requested a continuance of this item. Due to scheduling conflicts they
would be unable to attend the meeting.
Chairman Matsuhara moved, Rajander seconded, to continue the item to the meeting
of November 1, 1988. Motion approved 7-0.
6. GENTRY MEADOWLANDS UNIT NO. 5 - Jeff Lawrence, applicant
a. Planned Unit Development (PUD-9-88)
Pertains to a request to revise the Planned Unit Development for a portion of
the
Gentry Meadowlands project. The specific request is to allow reduced side yards on
houses with a 3 car garage including a "drive through" garage. The request includes
a
reduction in the front yard for houses with a side entry garage. The request affects lots
58 through 153 in Gentry Meadowlands Unit No. 5.
Senior Planner Moore reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the
record, noting that design changes in the staff report were directed towards upgrading
the proposed houses consistent with treatment of other developments of this lot
size. The proposed houses need to be better distinguished from the smaller lots in
Olde Towne. Staff recommended approval with conditions and changes as noted.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Chris Craiker, architect for the project, said that they present a large variety
of
elevations for each plan in the project, and that this unit is upgraded over "Olde Town"
in both interior and exterior designs. He discussed the flexibility of designs.
The public hearing was closed.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Planned Unit Development:
Commissioner Rajander moved, Gjervold-Mikalis seconded, to approve PUD-9-88
based on the required findings in Section 17.54.070 of the zoning Ordinance and
subject to
conditions of approval, A-N, deleting G, and amending the following conditions:
J. House Plan 4 shall be limited to 30% of the lots within the development.
L. 1. Optional feature
M. 1. Delete
N. The developer shall submit a development plan to the Planning Division
indicating which house plan and elevation type is proposed for each lot within the
project. No more than four (4) two story units shall be placed on adjacent lots fronting
on the same street unless in a cul-de-sac situation and approved by the City Planner
and with an exception that House Plan 4 may be substituted for a maximum of two (2)
of the required one story units. An average front setback of 20 feet shall be maintained
with a variation from 18 feet to 22 feet permitted. The 20 foot average does not include
those lots with the side entry garage.
Motion approved 6-0-1 (Abstaining: Weiss)
7. CALIFORNIA DRIVE SUBDIVISION - TIME EXTENSION
The applicants requested a time extension on the Tentative Map approved on October
21, 1986. Since that time California Drive has been designated as an arterial street.
The applicants have also submitted a request for a new Tentative Map onthis property
which would include the revised street design and lot pattern. Staff noted that the
applicant's concern is to have a valid land use approval on this property for financing
reasons. The time extension was not recommended, but staff suggested that it was
possible to delay final action of the time extension request for a maximum of 60 days
from the expiration date (October 31, 1988). This would allow time for the new
Tentative Map to be completed and presented to the Planning Commission for action.
Chairman Matsuhara moved, Rajander seconded, to continue the item to the meeting
of December 20, 1988. Motion approved 7-0.
8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
a. Resolution of Intention for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Swimming
Pool
Requirements.
Chairman Matsuhara moved, Weiss seconded, to approve the resolution of intention.
Motion approved 7-0.
b. Report of City Council actions regarding planning Commission items.
9. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to discuss at this regular meeting of the City Planning
Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 12:17 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Phyllis Lorenzo
Recording Secretary