HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_05222013 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 May 22, 2013
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair
7 Kevin Doble
8 Linda Sanders
9 Mike Whetzel
10 Laura Christensen
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
14 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
15 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
16
17 1. CALL TO ORDER
18 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Pruden at
19 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
20
21 2. ROLL CALL
22
23 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
24
25 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—The minutes from the April 10, 2013 meeting are included for review
26 and approval. The minutes from the April 24 and May 8, 2013 meetings will be available for review at the
27 June 12, 2013 meeting.
28
29 M/S Sanders/Christensen to approve the April 10, 2013 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried (3-0)with
30 Commissioner Whetzel and Chair Pruden abstaining.
31
32 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
33
34 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters at this meeting, the
35 final date to appeal is June 3, 2013.
36
37 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
38
39 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by staff.
40
41 9. PUBLIC HEARING
42 9A. Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project, 116 South State Street (File No.: 13-
43 11-MP-PC). Planning Commission consideration and possible action on a Mural Permit to allow
44 the installation of three murals at 116 South State Street, APN 002-226-08. The murals area
45 senior project for students of the AP English Literature class at Ukiah High School.
46
47 Associate Planner Faso: Presented the staff report.
48
49 Commission:
50 • Assumes the applicant has permission from the property owner to install the murals.
51 • Is there a completion date?
52
53 Staff:
54 • The property owner has given permission to install murals. The property owner signed the Site
55 Development Permit application.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 1
1 • No completion date has been given. The murals will be completed off-site and installed on the
2 building.
3
4 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:06 p.m.
5
6 Zane Molgaard, applicant:
7 • The Project is an effort by a group of Ukiah High School seniors completing their required senior
8 project. The assignment was to find a problem in the community and address it by using some
9 sort of art. The group elected to create and install their mosaic murals on the premise that
10 residents of communities with public displayed art are on average happier and more productive
11 than communities without publicly displayed art.
12 • The property owner has given permission to complete the proposed mural project
13 • The tiling on first mural has been completed and a color rendering of this mural was provided to
14 the Planning Commission.
15 • The Senior group intends to have the Project completed by July 2013.
16
17 Commission:
18 • Is there a maintenance plan for the murals in place?
19 • Will an encroachment permit be required when the murals are installed?
20 • Asked for clarification whether the sidewalk or the street is considered the public right-of-way and
21 whether doing something on the side of building does require an encroachment permit?
22 • Requested clarification the property owner has given permission to do the project. It is likely the
23 long term maintenance of the murals will fall on the building owner.
24 • If an encroachment permit is necessary would there be a charge? If so, would like to see this
25 charge waived for these High School students.
26 • Asked about how the murals will be attached to building.
27 • Highly approves of the project and its intent. The Project would help beautify the town.
28
29 Zane Molgaard:
30 • Affirmed the murals will be maintained by the Senior group and/or Ukiah High School staff.
31 • It is unlikely the public will damage/vandalize the murals because a tall ladder is necessary to
32 install the murals on the three existing frame inserts along the West Church Street wall of the
33 project site.
34 • Katherine Elliott is the property owner and she has given the applicant permission to do the
35 Project.
36 • There are options regarding maintenance of the murals and the property owner has been
37 informed.
38 • Explained how the murals will be attached.
39
40 Staff:
41 • Public Works did not provide any comments on the Project. While an encroachment permit would
42 likely be required, Planning staff is unable to answer the question because Public Works did not
43 provide any comments regarding the Project.
44 • Clarified the sidewalk is typically considered the public right-of-way. Doing something on the side
45 of building would likely require an encroachment permit and Public Works would make this
46 determination.
47 • An encroachment permit requires a fee.
48
49 Chair Pruden: City fees are adopted by Council. City Council would have to make a determination
50 about potentially waiving an encroachment permit fee.
51
52 Elizabeth Raybee:
53 • Confirmed the height from the sidewalk to the location of the murals is pretty great such that the
54 murals would not likely be tampered with/vandalized.
55 • Elaborated on how the murals will be installed on the building.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 2
1 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:15 p.m.
2
3 M/S Whetzel/Sanders to approve Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project (File No.: 13-11-
4 MP-PC)with Findings 1-4 and Conditions of Approval 1-8. Motion carried (5-0).
5
6 MURAL PERMIT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
7 THREE MURALS TO BE INSTALLED
8 AT 116 SOUTH STATE STREET, APN 002-226-08
9
10 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
11 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
12
13 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
14 Plan as described in the staff report.
15
16 2. The proposed murals are consistent with criteria contained in Section 3225 (G) of the Ukiah City
17 Code, supported by the following.
18
19 A. Compatibility with surrounding environment and community in general.
20
21 • The site contains a commercial structure and is located within the downtown
22 commercial district. As noted in the project description submitted by the applicant,
23 the murals would depict ideals important to Ukiah and the surrounding community.
24 Specifically the murals would represent 1) nature and environmentalism; 2)
25 intercultural understanding and cooperation and 3) music (see attachment 3, project
26 description).
27 • The proposed murals would be compatible with other murals in the downtown area in
28 that they would all have a similar focus (community interests) and would be mosaic
29 murals.
30 • The mosaic style of the murals would complement the brick fa�ade of the existing
31 commercial structure on the site.
32
33 B. Appropriateness of the proposed mural to the site.
34
35 • The site contains four different store fronts which include a wine tasting room, retail
36 store, law office and a jewelry shop. The themes of the murals represent the
37 community of Ukiah.
38 • The site is located in an area that will be highly visible to the General Public and
39 therefore will create a positive community feeling and " Sense of Place ", as noted in
40 the General Plan Community Design Element.
41 • The proposed murals would include a rendering of a wave, a tree and a person
42 playing a violin. The murals do not represent any of the uses of the building but
43 represent things that are important to the community.
44 • Based on the above the murals would be appropriate for this location.
45
46 C. Relationship to use of building upon which the mural will be place.
47
48 • The site contains a commercial building that houses four store fronts. The uses
49 include professional office, retail and wine tasting. These uses are available to the
50 general public and the proposed murals represent the Community of Ukiah therefore
51 based on this relationship the murals would be appropriate to this site while not
52 representing anything specific to the site.
53
54 D. Impact on motorist and traffic hazards.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 3
1
2 • The mural would be visible to motorists traveling on West Church Street. However,
3 the graphics do not flash, rotate, blink or move. The graphics also do not imitate or
4 resemble official traffic or road signs (e.g. "stop", "go slow", "caution", "danger",
5 "warning" or similar).
6 • The mural permit application has been reviewed by the Public Works Department
7 and they did not have any comments.
8 • The proposed mural would be out of the direct line of sign of motorists traveling on
9 West Church Street because the murals would be located along upper top portion of
10 the West Church Street elevation ( see attachment 4, photo of mural location)
11 • Based on the above the mural would not have an impact on motorists and would not
12 create a traffic hazard.
13
14 E. Advertising potential.
15
16 • The murals would not represent an advertising message but would convey a sense of
17 community involvement and wellbeing.
18 • The proposed murals would include a rendering of ocean wave, a tree and a person
19 playing a violin. The murals do not represent any of the uses of the building.
20
21 3. The proposed mural is compatible with surrounding land uses and will not cause impacts to
22 traffic, pedestrians or bicyclists since the murals will be attached to the building wall and will not
23 extend into the public right-of-way, pedestrian path, or parking area(s).
24
25 4. The proposed project, as conditioned, is exempt from the provisions of the California
26 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class 1(a),
27 which allows alterations to the exterior of an existing building when there is with no expansion of
28 the existing use based on the following:
29
30 A. The proposed project only involves minor alterations to the exterior of the building.
31 B. The proposed project does not involve an expansion of the existing use or building.
32
33 MURAL PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
34 THREE MURALS TO BE INSTALLED
35 AT 116 SOUTH STATE STREET, APN 002-226-08
36
37 1. This Mural Permit is granted only for the proposed murals addressed in the staff report and shall not
38 be construed as an approval for any additional murals or as eliminating or modifying any building,
39 use requirement.
40
41 2. This approval is not effective until the 10 day appeal period applicable to this Permit has been
42 exceeded, and any timely filed appeal has been reviewed.
43
44 3. All murals will be maintained in good condition. At any point as their condition becomes
45 deteriorated by graffiti, weathering or other means, as determined by the Planning Director, they
46 will be removed or obscured by the applicant or property owner.
47
48 4. This approval shall be null and void unless the California Environmental Quality AcUFish and
49 Game filing fee of $50 payable to Mendocino County is filed with the City of Ukiah Planning and
50 Community Development Department within five (5)days of this approval.
51
52 5. All murals shall conform to the application approved by the Planning Commission and to any
53 supporting documents submitted therewith or made part of the administrative record, including
54 staff reports, maps and renderings submittals or documents any change to this approval shall
55 require an amendment to this approval.
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 4
1 6. This approved Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved
2 project related to the Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and
3 conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of
4 approval; or if the established and use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
5 suspended for twenty-four(24) consecutive months.
6
7 7. This approval is not effective unless and until all other required discretionary entitlements have
8 been granted, issued or approved as applicable.
9
10 From the Buildinq Official (David Willouqhby)
11
12 8. A building permit is required before attachment of the murals to the building.
13
14 9B. B and B Warehouse Expansion, 923 Mazzoni Street (File No.: 13-10-SDP-PC). Planning
15 Commission consideration and possible action on a Site Development Permit to allow the
16 construction of a 5,600 square foot addition to an existing warehouse building at 923 Mazzoni
17 Street, APN 002-040-37.
18
19 Senior Planner Jordan introduced Planning Intern, Michele Johnson.
20
21 Michelle Johnson, Planning Intern gave a staff report.
22
23 Commission:
24 • Are there any public comments/questions concerning the Project?
25 • Related to attachment 2, items 6 and 7 from the Fire Marshal, asked why sprinkler systems were
26 waived for the Project.
27 • Requested clarification relative to Condition of Approval 16 that states, `If the building permit
28 value is equal to or greater than one-third of the value of the existing structure, curb, gutter,
29 sidewalk, and street trees, along the subject property street frontage shall be installed or repaired
30 if needed, pursuant to Section 9181 of the Ukiah City Code,' because a sidewalk exists in front of
31 the building and asked about how this is determined. Further questioned the language in
32 Condition of Approval 15 that states, `If the building permit value of work exceeds $101, 180 or
33 the proposed improvements create the net addition of two or more plumbing fixture units to the
34 building, the existing sanitary sewer later al shall be tested in accordance with City of Ukiah
35 Ordinance No. 1105, and repaired or replaced if required,' and inquired about the difference
36 between the two conditions of approval.
37 • Requested clarification the proposed Project does not meet the criteria to trigger curb, gutter, and
38 sidewalk improvements.
39 Staff:
40 • No public comments/questions were received by staff.
41 • Related to Condition #6, the Fire Marshal discussed the matter of requiring a sprinkler system
42 with the applicant. Based on the construction type being a metal building for metal storage, the
43 Fire Marshal determined a sprinkler system was not necessary. However, should the use of the
44 building change, a sprinkler system may be required which is why the Fire Marshal included the
45 condition as written that a change of use could require the installation of a sprinkler system.
46 • Related to Condition #7, fire extinguishers are a separate and different requirement than for a
47 sprinkler system and all projects require fire extinguishers.
48 • Related to Condition # 15, a sanitary sewer lateral test is triggered if the building permit value of
49 work exceeds$101,180.
50 • Related to Condition #16, this is a different requirement specific to frontage improvements and it
51 has a different valuation trigger for when they are required.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 5
1 • It is not known if Conditions of Approval 15 and 16 apply until the applicant applies for a building
2 permit and `the value of the work' is confirmed.
3 • Public Works includes Conditions#15 and #16 so the applicant is aware these requirements may
4 apply to their project.
5 • It is highly unlikely frontage improvements will be required since the only street frontage the
6 Project has is approximately 30-feet on Mazzoni that provides the driveway access to the site.
7 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:25 p.m.
8
9 Chair Pruden:
10 • Has the applicant experienced any type of vandalism to his property, equipment, or materials
11 since his property abuts the railroad tracks?
12 • Did not see a security fence on the site.
13 • Since the parcel line appears to go right through the applicanYs building, inquired if the applicant
14 intends to merge his property line to the bigger lot or further to the north or keep it as a another
15 parcel?
16 • Is there a current railroad landing?
17 • Further inquired if the applicant has problems with theft?
18 • Understands it is no longer possible to build a structure across a property line.
19 William Daniel:
20 • While transients/homeless persons are in the area, has experienced relatively little problems in
21 the last few years associated with graffiti and/or any type of vandalism. The vandalism seems to
22 be caused by young people not homeless and the graffiti by graffiti artists.
23 • Does not have a security fence, but is open to possibly constructing one in the future.
24 • Looking at his property and the proposed project, is not proposing to change the existing building
25 on the south property line because in his line of work storage area for equipmenUmaterial is
26 necessary to have outdoor storage of materials and the property to the north will probably always
27 be used for equipment and materials storage.
28 • Used to have access to a railroad landing, but the railroad removed it. Would be amenable to
29 using a landing if the railroad were to operate again in the capacity it once did. He used to receive
30 steel from the mills by way of the railroad.
31 • Over the years there have been some problems with theft, but not so much now since he installed
32 bars on the windows of the office. The buildings have alarm systems and the property is fenced
33 and gated.
34 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:30 p.m.
35
36 Commission:
37 • Is fine with staff's analysis pertinent to Table 1, Zoning Ordinance Consistency as it relates to
38 height, vehicle/bicycle parking and landscaping.
39 • Project conditions of approval 3 A,B, & C, 5/13 adequately address the required Lot Line
40 Adjustment(LLA).
41 • Support approval of the project.
42 M/S Doble/Sanders to approve B and B Warehouse Expansion (File No.: 13-10-SDP-PC) with Findings
43 1-5 and Conditions of Approval 1-25. Motion carried (5-0).
44
45 SITE DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
46 A 5,600 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING B 8� B WAREHOUSE
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 6
1 LOCATED AT 923 MAZZONI STREET, APN 002-040-37
2 FILE NO: 13-10-SDP-PC
3
4 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
5 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
6
7 1. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan as described in the
8 staff report.
9
10 2. The proposed Project is not located north of the boundaries of the Ukiah Municipal Airport
11 compatibility zone, and, therefore, is not subject to the compatibility requirements.
12
13 3. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in
14 Table 1 of the staff report.
15
16 4. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the following specific findings required
17 pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 9263(E) in order to approve a site development permit.
18
19 A. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as described in the General Plan
20 section above.
21
22 B. The proposed project site is currently developed and has a driveway. The project site does
23 not have street frontage therefore does not have a sidewalk. The proposed addition would be
24 located at the rear of the existing site and will not change the current pedestrian or vehicular
25 traffic pattern. Therefore the project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or
26 pedestrian traffic pattern.
27
28 C. The accessibility of the existing off-street parking and driveways would not change as a result
29 of the proposed addition therefore no hazardous or inconvenient conditions will be created on
30 adjacent streets.
31
32 D. The project site is located at the rear of the property and is currently separated from adjoining
33 building sites by perimeter fencing.
34
35 E. There is a single-family residence located to the west of the proposed addition. There are
36 trees and landscaping surrounding the residence that provides screening of the surrounding
37 manufacturing uses.
38
39 F. The site is zoned Manufacturing and located in an area developed with other similar
40 Manufacturing uses and development. Based on the location and zoning of the Project,
41 surrounding similar uses, and screening of the single-family residence to the north, no
42 screening is required. Also of note is that the Manufacturing zoning district does not include
43 landscaping requirements (see below).
44
45 G. The proposed addition will be located at the rear of the site and separated from buildings on
46 the site and adjacent properties a substantial distance. Therefore, there is adequate
47 separation between buildings and the Project will not restrict or cut out light and air on the
48 property or on adjacent properties.
49
50 H. The proposed addition is a continuation of an existing allowed use. The addition will allow
51 materials currently located outside to be stored indoors. This could improve the appearance
52 of the site and as such will not hinder the development or future use of industrial buildings in
53 the neighborhood.
54
55 I. N/A-The site is not located in or adjacent to a residential zoning district.
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 7
1 J. The site is located in an industrial/manufacturing area developed with an existing
2 office/warehouse building, parking area, and the ground is primarily covered in gravel. No
3 water courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood plain or other environmentally
4 sensitive areas are present.
5
6 K. The proposed addition is located at the rear of the site and will be consistent in design and
7 materials to the existing building. The use of the building is warehouse for steel and metal
8 storage. This type of building usually has a simple rectangular form in order to allow proper
9 use and function. The design of the addition will continue the form, materials, and colors of
10 the existing building which is appropriate for the use, setting, and design for an addition. The
11 addition will not be visible from public locations.
12
13 5. The proposed project, as conditioned, is exempt from the provisions of the California
14 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class 1(e)(2) ,
15 that consists of projects that involve additions to existing structures provided that the addition will
16 not result in an increase of more than 10,000 square feet; the project is located in an area where
17 all public services and facilities are available and the project site is not located in an
18 environmentally sensitive area. The exemption is based on the following:
19
20 A. The total square footage of the addition is 5,600 square feet.
21
22 B. The project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area in that the site is located in
23 an urban area that includes a variety of industrial uses. The site is developed with a building
24 that is currently used and will continue to be used for offices/warehouse and associated
25 parking areas and landscaping. No water courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood
26 plain or other environmentally sensitive areas are present. No trees will be removed as a
27 result of the addition.
28
29 C. The project site is located in an area where all public services and facilities are available.
30
31 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
32 A 5,600 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING B & B WAREHOUSE
33 LOCATED AT 923 MAZZONI STREET, APN 002-040-37
34 FILE NO: 13-10-SDP-PC
35
36 1. Approval is granted for the 5,600 square foot addition to the existing warehouse located at 923
37 Mazzoni Street as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and date stamped
38 April 03, 2013 and May 15, 2013 except as modified by the following conditions of approval.
39
40 2. On plans submitted for building permit these conditions of approval shall be included as notes on
41 the first sheet.
42
43 3. In order to comply with zoning ordinance, building, and fire code requirements related to the
44 location of the proposed addition and the north side property line, the Project is subject to the
45 following conditions:
46
47 A. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a site plan drawn to scale that includes the
48 location of the existing building, proposed addition, all of the information required to be
49 provided on building permit site plans, and the proposed relocation of the parcel line shared
50 with APN 002-040-17. The relocated property line and location of the addition in relationship
51 to the property line shall demonstrate compliance with zoning ordinance, building and fire
52 code requirements.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 8
1 B. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment(LLA) is required. The plans submitted
2 for the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in condition#3A above and
3 consistent with zoning, building and fire code requirements.
4 C. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the approved LLA shall be recorded and documentation
5 of the recorded LLA provided to the Planning Department.
6
7 4. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff review and
8 approval:
9
10 A. Elevations of the building that include the proposed finished grade and height of the
11 building. The height of the addition shall match the height of the existing warehouse building
12 and shall comply with the height requirement of the Manufacturing zoning district.
13
14 From the Building Official (David Willoughbv)
15
16 5. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment (LLA) is required. The plans submitted for
17 the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in condition #3A above and consistent with
18 zoning, building and fire code requirements.
19
20 From the Fire Marshal (Chuck Yates)
21
22 6. Due to the type of building proposed (steel) and the contents to be stored in the building (steel)
23 the requirement for sprinklers shall be waived. If, in the future, the occupancy or the
24 contents located in the structure change, the current requirement for sprinklers, alarms, exiting,
25 exit lighting and all current requirements, will be immediately enforced according to the code.
26
27 7. Portable fire extinguishers shall be required according to the code and the occupancy ha1. Due
28 to the type of building proposed (steel)and the contents to be stored in the building (steel)the
29 requirement for sprinklers shall be waived. If, in the future, the occupancy or the contents located
30 in the structure change, the current requirement for sprinklers, alarms, exiting, exit lighting and all
31 current requirements, will be immediately enforced according to the code.
32
33 8. Portable fire extinguishers shall be required according to the code and the occupancy hazards
34 (Title 19).
35
36 9. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
37 jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by
38 an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site hydrants and mains
39 shall be provided where required by the fire code official. (CBC 508.5.1)
40
41 10. In locations where flammable vapors could be present, precautions shall be taken to prevent
42 ignition by eliminating or controlling sources of ignition. Open flames and high-temperature
43 devices shall not be used in a manner which creates a hazardous condition. Heating equipment
44 shall be of a type approved for hazardous locations (CFC 3403.5) (Title 19).
45
46 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
47 jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by
48 an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site hydrants and mains shall
49 be provided where required by the fire code official. (CBC 508.5.1)
50
51 12. In locations where flammable vapors could be present, precautions shall be taken to prevent
52 ignition by eliminating or controlling sources of ignition. Open flames and high-temperature
53 devices shall not be used in a manner which creates a hazardous condition. Heating equipment
54 shall be of a type approved for hazardous locations (CFC 3403.5)
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 9
1 From the Department of Public Works (Ben Kaqevama )
2
3 13. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment(LLA) is required. The plans submitted for
4 the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in condition #3A above and consistent with
5 zoning, building and fire code requirements.
6
7 14. All areas of circulation shall be paved with a minimum of 2" of AC on 6" of Base, concrete, or
8 other suitable all-weather surface approved by the City Engineer. This includes the proposed
9 driveways and parking areas. If heavy truck traffic is anticipated from the solid waste company,
10 delivery trucks, or other heavy vehicles, the pavement section should be calculated appropriately
11 to ensure that it can withstand the loading.
12
13 15. If the building permit value of work exceeds $101,180, or the proposed improvements create the
14 net addition of two or more plumbing fixtures units to the building, the existing sanitary sewer
15 lateral shall be tested in accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 1105, and repaired or
16 replaced if required.
17
18 16. If the building permit value is equal to or greater than one-third of the value of the existing
19 structure, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees, along the subject property street frontage, shall
20 be installed or repaired if needed, pursuant to Section 9181 of the Ukiah City Code. This may
21 include upgrades of existing sidewalk to meet current ADA standards.
22
23 17. Any work within the public right-of-way shall be performed by a licensed and properly insured
24 contractor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within this area or
25 otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3% of estimated
26 construction costs.
27
28 Standard Citv Requirement
29
30 18. Construction hours are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
31
32 19. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
33 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
34 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
35 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
36 and issued.
37
38 20. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
39 to building permit final.
40
41 21. Building, Grading or other required Permits shall be issued within two years after the effective
42 date of the Site Development Permit, or the discretionary actions granted by the permit shall
43 expire. In the event the required Permits cannot be issued within the stipulated period from the
44 project approval date, a one year extension may be granted by the Director of Planning if no new
45 circumstances affect the project which otherwise would render the original approval inappropriate
46 or illegal. It is the applicanYs responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to
47 the Planning Department prior to the two-year expiration date.
48
49 22. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Site Development Permit shall be granted only for the
50 specific purposes stated in the action approving the Site Development Permit and shall not be
51 construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except to such
52 specific purposes.
53
54 23. The approved Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if
55 the approved project related to the Site Development Permit is not being conducted in
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 10
1 compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established
2 within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the
3 permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty four(24) consecutive months.
4
5 24. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
6 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
7
8 25. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
9 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
10 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
11 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
12 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
13 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
14 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
15 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
16 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
17 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
18 remain in full force and effect.
19
20 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
21 • There will be no regular June 12 Planning Commission meeting.
22 • Tentatively discussed Planning Commission dates for Costco project.
23
24 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
25 Commissioner Sanders inquired about the status of the project condition that required a basketball hoop
26 and net for the RCHDC Orchard Manor project.
27
28 Chair Pruden: Has already advised staff that RCHDC is not in compliance with the aforementioned
29 condition and noted a letter to this effect has been sent by Planning staff.
30
31 Commissioner Sanders: Asked about the status of the former Post Office on Oak Street.
32
33 Staff will inquire in this regard report back.
34
35 Commissioner Sanders: Has observed that McDonald's at Perkins and Orchard Streets is using the
36 existing tree wells for advertisement purposes and it is her understanding this is likely a prohibited
37 activity. Does not support this type of signage for a primary City gateway.
38
39 Commissioner Sanders: Asked if the LED reader board sign at the church located on Orchard Avenue
40 is legal.
41
42 Staff: Sign Ordinance prohibits flashing signs. For this reason, the message on the sign cannot change
43 more often than every 8 seconds. This was included as a condition on the sign permit.
44
45 Commissioner Whetzel: Airport Day is June 1.
46
47 Chair Pruden: The landscaping at the Post Office Annex is in very poor condition and is an eye sore.
48
49 12. ADJOURNMENT
50 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:42 p.m.
51
52
53 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 22, 2013
Page 11