HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_02082012 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 February 8, 2012
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair None
7 Jason Brenner
8 Kevin Doble
9 Linda Sanders
10 Mike Whetzel
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Charley Stump, Planning Director 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
19 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
20 Ukiah, California.
21
22 2. ROLL CALL
23
24 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
25
26 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes from the December 14, 2011, December 20, 2011,
27 January 11, 2012 and January 25, 2012 meetings will be available for review and approval at the
28 February 22, 2012 meeting.
29
30 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
31
32 6. APPEAL PROCESS—Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting,
33 the final date to appeal is Monday, February 21, 2012 at 5:00 p.m.
34
35 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Site visit for agenda item 9B was verified.
36
37 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE — Agenda item 9A was properly noticed in accordance with the
38 provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
39
40 9. PUBLIC HEARING
41 9A. Walmart Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report (File Nos.: 09-28-SDP-PC and 09-
42 42-EIR-PC)). Conduct a public hearing, receive public comment, provide Planning Commission
43 comment, and provide direction to staff on the Walmart Expansion Project 1) Major Site
44 Development Permit and associated modifications to landscaping requirements, and 2)
45 Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Project is located at 1155 Airport Park Boulevard,
46 APN 180-070-38, in the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development (AIP PD). The project
47 proposes a 47,621 square foot expansion of the existing 109,030 square foot store, for a total
48 square footage of 156,651 to include expanded general merchandise floor area and expanded
49 grocery sales floor area, indoor and outdoor garden centers, as well as the possibility of distilled
50 alcohol sales, and a medical clinic and/or vision center on a 13.44 acre site. Also included as part
51 of the project is a change in store hours to 24 hours per day, seven days per week, modifications
52 to the design of the exterior of the building, the addition of a new parking spaces, modifications to
53 the landscaping, and other associated site improvements.
54 The proposed Project requires approval of a Major Site Development Permit, two modifications to
55 the AIP PD landscaping requirements, and adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 1
1 As part of the Major Site Development Permit, the Planning Commission will consider the
2 applicant's request for approval of modifications to the AIP PD landscaping requirements for
3 landscaping lot coverage and shade coverage. Approval of the project would also require a
4 Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable Traffic Impacts
5 identified in the Walmart Expansion EIR. This item was continued from the November 9, 2011,
6 December 14, 2011, January 11, 2012, and the January 25, 2012 Planning Commission
7 meetings.
8
9 Planning Director Stump:
10 • The purpose of tonight's meeting is to pick up where we left off at the January 25, 2012 regular
11 meeting. Accordingly, at the January 25 meeting, the Commission opened the public hearing for
12 the Walmart Site Development Permit and associated landscaping modifications, received public
13 comment, received a presentation from the applicants and began deliberations on the Site
14 Development Permit.
15 • Due to time constraints, the Commission did not have an opportunity to discuss and deliberate on
16 the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
17 • After considerable discussion on the Site Development Permit, the Commission developed a list
18 of additional information it needs to fully understand the project. The applicant agreed to provide
19 the information to the best of its ability.
20 • The Commission requested the applicant provide the following information in response to the
21 information in Attachment No. 1 of the staff report:
22 1. Revise the western elevation to modify the upward sloping canopies to a more typical
23 downward sloping canopies/awnings. This was deemed important for shading on the western
24 side of the building.
25 2. Revise the north elevation of the building in the vicinity of the roll-up doors to provide more
26 building articulation.
27 3. With regard to the site plan, show an outside employee lounge area with design amenities to
28 include benches, etc.
29 4. With regard to the site plan, show/highlight the pedestrian access facilities and/or a
30 Pedestrian Access Plan.
31 5. Use textured concrete for the pedestrian areas in front of the access points to the building.
32 6. Discuss with Public Works and the MRA about relocating the bus shelter further east.
33 7. Discuss with Public Works about considering the adding a mid-block crosswalk on
34 Commerce Drive.
35 8. Use more tree planting strips in the parking lot rather than individual tree planting wells.
36 9. Recalculate the landscaping coverage taking into account the bus shelter and 6-foot wide
37 walkways.
38 10. Provide a site plan representation showing how the 20% landscaping coverage could be
39 achieved with a reduced parking and building footprint, etc., that would indicate what
40 compliance with the 20°/a landscaping coverage would look like.
41 11. Submit an exhibit that provides details about the proposed LID improvements.
42 12. With regard to the Landscape Plan, add trees to the east side of the building to screen it
43 more from the highway.
44 • The applicant has committed to providing this information for tonighYs meeting and will provide a
45 presentation on the information submitted and the changes made to the project in response to the
46 Commission's January 25�h requests.
47 • The Commission will open the public hearing and focus on the information provided that was
48 requested at the January 25 meeting. After review of the Site Development Permit and the
49 applicanYs new approach to landscaping/landscaping modifications staff requests the
50 Commission discuss the Statement of Overriding Considerations and provide direction to staff.
51 The Commission will take public statements concerning the Statement of Overriding Conditions
52 • The Ukiah Municipal Code requires that findings be made in order to approve the Site
53 Development Permit and these are includes on pages 3 and 4 of the staff report.
54 • There have been considerable requests about traffic mitigations that involve California
55 Department of Transportation and City staff and referred to a letter from the Department of
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 2
1 Transportation dated January 25, 2012 in which concerns were expressed with the adequacy of
2 the EIR and City's findings for making a determination of Overriding Considerations for the
3 project's significant impacts. Caltrans requested the following comments be made known to the
4 Planning Commission:
5 1. Caltrans has permit authority over the design of traffic mitigation measures within Caltrans
6 right-of-way.
7 2. Previous comments regarding the DEIR for this project attempted to identify where the traffic
8 analysis did not conform to Caltrans standards and where the results of the analysis will not
9 support the design of proposed traffic mitigation measures.
10 3. The deficiencies in the analysis may be critical in identifying the project's impacts as well as
11 the appropriate mitigation.
12 4. Based on the identified deficiencies, Caltrans does not have confidence that the project's
13 impacts have been adequately defined as well as significant remaining concerns that the
14 appropriate traffic mitigation has not been identified.
15 5. As presented, the project will likely result in significant impacts, including congestion and/or
16 traffic safety impacts that require a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
17 6. Recommends the City withhold approval of the project or issuance of a building permit until
18 feasible mitigation measures with cost estimates are determined for both direct and
19 cumulative impacts.
20 7. Offers to assist the City to ensure that the interest of the traveling public is served.
21 • City staff has been in contact with Caltrans about their letter and corresponding concerns and
22 indicated to them that staff is developing more detailed information about alternatives that may
23 solve the traffic impact problems in the event the AIP builds out. As part of the process, staff is
24 trying to identify funding sources to make necessary improvements to infrastructure in the area.
25 The lack of funding sources is the reason why the impacts were significant and unavoidable. In
26 the near future there should be some more detailed information about the mitigation program and
27 potential funding sources for the program.
28 • No action will be taken tonight on the Site Development Permit and associated landscaping
29 modifications and Statement on Overriding Considerations.
30
31 Standley Iverson, TAIT and Associates addressed the requests made by the Commission at the
32 previous meeting and addressed corresponding modifications:
33 1. Provide more shade on the western elevation, particularly at the entrances, and change the type
34 of shade trees at the front of the store.
35 Modification
36 All vestibule canopies will slope down away from the building instead of sloping up, which results
37 in lowering the front edge of the canopy by 31/2 feet, bring the overhand down closer to the
38 pedestrians and providing them with better shade coverage.
39
40 Crape Myrtle trees have been changed and will install Trident Maple trees instead.
41 The new Chinese Pistache trees will be all male.
42 Noted Cherry Laurel is actually Flowering Plum.
43
44 2. Provide articulate at the roll-up doors to the indoor garden center on the North elevation.
45 Modification
46 A standing seam canopy supported by columns with cultured stone wrapped bases will be
47 provided.
48 The canopy will be similar in design to the canopy that will be provided on the south elevation at
49 the outside employee break area.
50 3. Provide an outside area for employees with design amenities, i.e., benches
51 Modification
52 An outside employee break area will be provided on the south side of the building. It will include a
53 standing seam canopy supported by columns with cultured stone wrapped bases similar in design
54 to the canopy that will be provided on the north elevation. This canopy will shade an area that
55 covers 3 of the proposed bicycle racks and 2 picnic tables with benches.
56 4. Show the pedestrian access facilities on the site plan
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 3
1 Modification
2 Pedestrian access facilities were shown on the attached updated site plan. The sidewalks have
3 been widened to 6 feet.
4 5. Provide stamped and/or colored concrete at the pedestrian crossing areas in front of the store.
5 Modification
6 New decorative concrete with MUTCD striping will be provided at the pedestrian crossing areas in
7 front of the 3 building entry points.
8 6. Relocate the bus stop to the east side of the entry driveway on Commerce Drive.
9 Modification
10 The bus stop with MRA provided bus shelter will be relocated to the east side of the Commerce
11 Drive entrance. A sidewalk connection has been provided for pedestrian access to the bus stop.
12 An alternative location for this bus stop is on the west side of Commerce Drive.
13 7. Provide a crosswalk mid-block on Commerce Drive
14 Modification
15 A new mid-block crosswalk on Commerce Drive, near the proposed bus stop will be provided.
16 This location is beyond the Walmart driveway and provides for easier connection to existing
17 sidewalk on the south side of Commerce Drive.
18 8. Considered different ways to meet the 20% landscape requirement with calculations taking into
19 account the bus stop pad and 6-foot wide sidewalks. Worked with the City Fire Department and
20 City Planning staff to reduce the width of the fire lane.
21 Modification
22 Grass turf surfaces will be provided at the rear store fire lane and the head-in parking stalls along
23 Airport Park Boulevard. The inclusion of these grass turf surface areas allows the project to meet
24 the 20% landscaping requirement. The project will provide 20.1% landscaping. Grasspave is a
25 porous pavement product that allows parking, riding, driving, and walking on a live grass surface.
26 This product would be used on the 20-foot wide fire access lane behind the building and along
27 the parking stalls fronting Airport Park Boulevard. If the Commission accepts this product as
28 landscaping, the percentage of landscaping on the site would increase to 10.1%
29 9. Provide information regarding the storm water treatment unit at the southeast corner of the site.
30 Modification
31 The project will install a 8' x 16' Storm Filter treatment vault whereby drainage shed map, sizing
32 calculations and project details are provided.
33 10. Provide information regarding tree location in regards to the detention area on the northeast
34 corner of the site.
35 Modification
36 The project will install all new trees outside the proposed bioretention area. This area
37 configuration has been modified to avoid existing trees that are to be retained. Bioretention area
38 shed map, sizing calculations, and other informational details are provided.
39 11. Provide additional trees on the east side to screen the rear of the store.
40 Modification
41 Additional trees will be added to screen the rear of the store with an emphasis on screening the
42 loading dock area.
43
44 Additional information:
45 • Information is being provided regarding the adequacy of the tree wells in the parking lot since
46 concern was expressed by the Commission.
47 • Walmart will provide information to Sonoma Sweepers about care/maintenance of the parking lot
48 trees and other landscaping related duties.
49
50 There was discussion what landscaping features were included as part of the 20.1% and whether the
51 landscaping calculations have been updated in this regard.
52
53 Chair Pruden:
54 Q1. Requested clarification regarding the meandering sidewalk on the west side and whether a
55 porous material has been selected for this.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 4
1 Q2. In terms of landscaping, sod is shown to be removed in different areas for parking lot expansion.
2 Will some of older sod that is not affected by parking going to be removed and if so, will
3 GrassPave be used?
4 Q3. Requested clarification that sod will not be removed unless it is necessary for parking.
5 Q4. Requested clarification the frontage lane between the parking lot and the building will remain the
6 same width.
7 Q5. Is there any particular reason the Plum Trees located at the terminus of the property line on the
8 east side of the site can remain?
9
10 Standley Iverson:
11 A1. The meandering sidewalk will not be of porous material. The sidewalk width will be 6 feet
12 consisting of normal concrete per City standards.
13 A2. The sod areas being removed are located behind the store and demonstrated the specific
14 locations on the site plan.
15 A3. Confirmed sod will not be removed unnecessarily and will only be removed for parking and the
16 transition to grade.
17 A4. There is no change to the width.
18 A5. The trees will not be retained due to changes made to the site in this area that will result in a new
19 drive aisle. The changes that will be made to the elevation cannot support retention of the trees
20 as they currently exist. With the changes the tree wells would be below the grade surface.
21
22 Commissioner Whetzel: Asked why his request for a site plan showing how the 20% landscaping
23 coverage could be achieved with reduced parking, reduced building footprint, etc., and what a 20%
24 landscaping coverage would look like was not provided?
25
26 Chair Pruden: The applicant was obviously not willing to reduce the building footprint and proposed the
27 use of grasspave in the fire access lane behind the building and along the parking stalls fronting Airport
28 Park Boulevard to achieve the 20% landscaping.
29
30 Chair Pruden: Asked that commenters speak only about the changes the applicant has proposed for the
31 project.
32
33 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:20 p.m.
34
35 Dennis Slota:
36 • Is a storm water specialist for the County.
37 • Has discussed the Walmart Expansion Project with the State Regional Water Quality Control
38 Board and the comments made on behalf of this agency is that the Project does not meet their
39 standards.
40 • The State Regional Water Control Board is interested in commenting on this project and would
41 like to be advised of the outcome.
42 • Has presented the agency with the revised plans.
43 • Would like to comment on the Grassturf surface and storm water treatment.
44 • Does not support the use of the GrassPave. The technique and materials used involve
45 formulating a compact subgrade which is essentially `soil concrete' in which sand and gravel is
46 compacted with the application of a plastic grid on top, more sand and fertilizer followed by a thin
47 turf.
48 • What will occur is water will permeate 2 inches down into the ground, hit the subgrade and
49 essentially run horizontally out carrying with it the fertilizer that will then go to the storm drain
50 filters.
51 • Storm drain filters are considered the most expensive and the least effective storm water
52 treatment mechanism.
53 • This is a lose, lose situation. There would be approximately 30 cartridges to change using the
54 storm drain filter system.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 5
1 • Will Walmart effectively manage this storm water filter system and actually change the filters
2 when necessary. We have already seen how poorly Walmart maintained/cared for the
3 landscaping on the site, particularly the parking lot trees. What assurance will we have that
4 Walmart will properly maintain their filters and change them routinely. We do not know whether or
5 not the filters will be disposed of properly. Filters may be considered hazardous waste, which of
6 course, adds to the cost.
7 • With regard to site changes and the tree wells being below the grade surface, this is exactly what
8 should occur. We want the curbs to be removed and allow the parking to infiltrate into vegetation
9 and/or trees. The subgrade would have to broken up because all this has been compacted, which
10 is part of the reason no vegetation grows.
11 • There are many ways to perform Low Impact Development (LID) on this site, some of which is
12 being done on the back portion of the property with the bio-swale. There is still much more that
13 can be done that is not being discussed. For example, there is no reason the meandering
14 sidewalk cannot be porous instead of concrete/asphalt. We do not want black surfaces. There is
15 enough heat generated from parking lots. Walmart could reduce the amount of heat impacts to
16 the community generated from their parking lot by using a lighter material and/or the application
17 of porous paving and/or other options.
18 • Has concern about the proposed lighting system with regard to compliance with the International
19 Dark Sky Association standards.
20 • Does not support the store would be open 24-hours daily. Is of the opinion this disrupts family life
21 and the character of the community.
22
23 Commissioner poble:
24 • Appreciates Mr. Slota's comments regarding storm water treatment.
25 • Regarding discussions with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, since the project is
26 disturbing more than an acre it would follow that the project would be required to go through this
27 Board for permit purposes. Would this then be the opportunity for the State Water Board to
28 review the project?
29 • Requested clarification that the State Water Board requires water balance on the site for all new
30 impervious surfaces for the expansion and cannot move forward with the project without
31 compliance with the regulation?
32
33 Dennis Slota:
34 • Is of the opinion we are getting pretty far along in the process for the State to make comments. It
35 would seem the Board would be involved at this stage.
36 • Agrees there should be discussions now.
37 • Is not familiar with all Board regulations relevant to the water balance issue. The Board's
38 comments were directed toward storm water treatment.
39
40 Susan Knopf:
41 • Asked about the City Code landscaping coverage percentage and whether turf surface would be
42 counted as part of the landscaping percentage.
43 • How many trees are required for the project and how many are proposed?
44 • Supports retention of the Plum trees.
45
46 Chair Pruden: The landscaping coverage requirement is 20%. A determination will have to be made
47 whether or not the turf surface is acceptable as a landscaping component. At this point the 20.1% does
48 include the turf surfaces.
49
50 One tree is required for every 4 parking spaces for this project as well as with compliance with the 20%
51 landscaping coverage requirement. The number of trees is related to the size of the project and
52 associated percentages of landscaping that includes grass, shrubs, bushes, plants and trees. The
53 applicant is planting more trees than what currently exists on the site.
54
55 Sandra Wilhite:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 6
1 • Would like to see more trees in the parking lot.
2 • Supports changes to the trees species for the parking lot.
3 • Regarding lighting, the parking lot lighting should be bright enough for safety purposes. Is not so
4 much concerned with the height of the light as she is about safety precautions taken in the
5 parking lot.
6
7 Terry Silky:
8 • Commented on some of the visionary objectives for Ukiah that includes the responsible use of
9 natural resources and freedom from unnecessary traffic and noise.
10 • Removal of the Plum trees counteracts a visionary objective.
11
12 Alan Nicholson:
13 • Allowing Walmart the ability to plant the parking lot with grass surfacing virtually eliminates all the
14 rest of the landscaping required not only at Walmart but for any commercial/retail establishment
15 in town.
16 • GrassPave will not likely stand up to car parking.
17 • Contacted a business that manufactures turf surfacing and noted the representative does not
18 recommend this type of product for a retail parking lot. Too many cars driving over the surfacing
19 will eventually kill the grass. Walmart has a lot of traffic so it is doubtful the turf surfacing will hold
20 up.
21 • The use of turf surface is a really drastic measure to take to comply with City landscaping
22 standards.
23 • Reviewed the landscaping requirements for the Project and noted AIP Ordinance 1098 items a-q
24 talks about those requirements. Specifically, item g states, `Landscape plantings shall be those
25 which grow well in Ukiah's climate without extensive irrigation. Native species are strongly
26 encouraged.' Item h, states `All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity
27 so that a viable and mature appearance can be attained in three years.' Is of the opinion the turf
28 surface would be dead within three years. Walmart is notorious for not maintaining their
29 landscaping.
30 • It is not appropriate for Ukiah to recognize GrassPave as a proper landscaping product and that it
31 complies with Ukiah's landscaping objectives.
32
33 James Hageman:
34 • Is the manager of Food Maxx.
35 • Does not agree that Walmart allows loitering on the northeast portion of the site because this has
36 an effect on his store.
37 • Specifically recalls Commissioner Whetzel requesting the applicant provide a schematic site plan
38 showing how the building footprint would look having to comply with the City's 20°/a landscaping
39 standard.
40 • Does not support relocating the bus stop to the side where Walmart is located. Food Maxx
41 customers would then have to cross the street to access the bus stop. The current location of the
42 bus stop is appropriate and works fine for his customers that he sees on a daily basis.
43 • Addressed the Commission's discussion about how Walmart should handle overflow parking,
44 particularly during peak shopping periods.
45 • Does not agree with the shared parking concept with other tenants to meet peak shopping
46 periods wherein such a solution is grossly unfair. Food Maxx and the other tenants pay their
47 property taxes and the cost of maintaining the parking lot. There is no just cause to ask the other
48 tenants/property owners in our shopping center to subsidize the parking needs for Walmart
49 customers should Walmart have insufficient parking to accommodate its customers during peak
50 shopping periods even though Walmart meets their parking requirements. To this end, it is
51 Walmart's responsibility to modify the site plans by possibly making the building footprint smaller
52 to be able to effectively address their parking needs, particularly during peak shopping periods.
53 • Is concerned that Walmart would be allowed to expand to include a grocery department that is
54 likely to have a negative impact on Food Maxx. His employees make a good living wage.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 7
1 Debbie Vinson:
2 • Supports retention of the Plum Trees and if this is not possible would, as a member of the Ukiah
3 Garden Club, be willing to take them for planting in another location.
4
5 Julia Wood:
6 • Noticed Walmart has made some positive changes for the project and cited some of these
7 changes that include crosswalk provisions and the addition of trees that do not present a safety
8 hazard to pedestrians.
9 • The only solution for relocating the bus stop is to put it in another bus stop. There is really no
10 need to relocate the existing bus stop if an appropriately marked crosswalk is installed at the
11 present location. Relocation of the bus stop to the Walmart side creates a problem for people in
12 the adjacent shopping center.
13
14 Alan Nicholson: If City code requires 1 tree for every 4 parking spaces, questioned why Walmart
15 landscaping plans indicate 1 tree for every 8 spaces.
16
17 Chair Pruden: Will check on this aspect.
18
19 Derek: Allowing for a Walmart Supercenter would take away from the small town character Ukiah has.
20
21 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:52 p.m.
22
23 Chair Pruden: Asked staff if MTA initiated the change in the location of the bus stop or did Walmart
24 approach MTA about a change. It may be moving the bus stop over to the Walmart side of the street may
25 be for safety reasons.
26
27 Planning Director Stump: Is almost certain MTA proposed the change. There was correspondence from
28 MTA dated September 7, 2011 talking about the existing bus stop relative to safety and other factors.
29
30 Commissioner poble:
31 • Asked about the solar array project.
32 • This is an architectural feature to look at.
33 • The solar array project did not come up in the presentation from the applicant and is of the
34 opinion the Commission should be made aware of this project.
35 • Desires some information about this project.
36
37 Planning Director Stump:
38 • Advised the solar array is a separate project.
39 • Does not know the details of the design.
40 • The Building Permit application just came in for the solar array project.
41
42 Deborah Herron, Walmart Public Affairs
43 • The solar application that was submitted to the City Building Department last week is from a
44 company that Walmart works with for solar roofs. This matter is separate from the Walmart
45 Expansion Project.
46 • The applicant was not asked to address the aspects of the solar array application for today's
47 meeting.
48 • The intent was to show that Walmart is making a good faith effort so that the Commission could
49 see what a solar application would look like on the existing roof.
50 • Wanted to make certain that the application as it was submitted is not finalized. Whether or not
51 the solar project is finalized depends upon the outcome of the Expansion Project.
52
53 Commissioner Whetzel: Is of the opinion the solar project is connected to the Walmart Expansion
54 Project or it is now that the Commission has been made aware. Is assuming the building will be expanded
55 and the solar array installed at the same time to save costs.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 8
1 Deborah Herron: If the Expansion Project is approved, the solar array project will follow.
2
3 Commissioner Whetzel: It would be nice to see some kind of site plan that includes this feature. If there
4 is to be an expansion containing a solar panel, the Commission would want to review the plans.
5
6 Deborah Herron:
7 • If the Expansion Project is approved the applicant would come back to the City with the solar plan
8 that would include the expanded roof and the expanded building.
9 • Clarified what is filed right now is the solar plan for the existing building.
10
11 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
12
13 Deborah Herron provided a presentation:
14 • Is present to talk about how the benefits of the Walmart project outweigh the `unmitigateable'
15 traffic impacts.
16 • Wants to make it clear Walmart will partner with the City in solving the traffic issues.
17 • Walmart is absolutely committed to putting forth their proportional share for the necessary traffic
18 improvements when this is determined.
19 • 4,500 people come through the Walmart doors every day so it is important/imperative that
20 Walmart provide for an aesthetically pleasing project that offers convenience, a pleasant
21 shopping experience and a wide-variety of products and services 24-hours a day.
22 • Elaborated on the benefits of the project:
23 1. Remodel and update the existing older building to make it more operable and efficient.
24 2. Provide for local sourcing from businesses and farms, ranches.
25 3. Enhanced community giving with an expanded store anywhere from Ukiah Food Bank, parks,
26 libraries and more.
27 4. Reduction to unemployment with 85 new jobs created and currently filled positions.
28 5. Expanded products and services to customers
29 6. One-stop shopping.
30 7. Advanced sustainability technologies to include the Grasspave product, LED signage,
31 illumination refrigeration, building daylight harvesting, new paint on the building that is
32 sustainable, reusable bag program, and other sustainable technologies.
33 8. City infrastructure investment through tax revenues.
34 9. Extended hours of customers being open 24 hours daily for convenience purposes.
35 10. Volunteer corps that employees take very seriously whereby they volunteer in all types of
36 organizations across the City.
37 11. Proportional share to solving Talmage interchange. Walmart recognizes how serious this
38 issue is.
39 • Provided a list of organizations in Ukiah that Walmart has contributed to.
40 • Thanked the Commission for their thoughtful consideration these past months going through the
41 EIR, Sight Development Permit and corresponding landscaping modifications and Statement of
42 Overriding Considerations approval process.
43
44 It was noted by Director Stump with regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations:
45
46 1. If the Commission determines the project is consistent with the required findings for a Site
47 Development Permit and grants the landscaping modifications, a Statement of Overriding
48 Consideration would be required in order to approve the Site Development Permit.
49 2. A Statement of Overriding Considerations is required when the EIR identified significant and
50 unavoidable environmental impacts associated with the project.
51 3. In the case of the Walmart Expansion Project EIR, significant and unavoidable traffic impacts
52 have been identified.
53 4. CEQA Guidelines section 15093(a) states CEQA requires the decision-making agency to
54 balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the a
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 9
1 proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to
2 approve the project.
3 5. If the Commission determines the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable
4 adverse environmental effects of the project, the adverse environmental effects may be
5 considered acceptable. Some considerations thereof include:
6 • Additional jobs created by project.
7 • Additional revenue for the City that is generated by the project by way of sales, tax,
8 property tax, and business license tax as addressed in the Fiscal Impact Report
9 completed for the project.
10 • Landscaping improvements to the parking lot.
11 • Improvements to pedestrian facilities.
12 • Other considerations identified by the Commission.
13 6. If the Commission determines the benefits of the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable
14 environmental effects identified in the EIR as addressed in attachment 3 relative to the Traffic and
15 Circulation, CEQA Guidelines section 15093(b) states the agency shall state in writing the
16 specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information 1 the record.
17 The Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the
18 record. This formally known as the Statement of Overriding Considerations. In the event the
19 Commission determines the benefits of the project do not outweigh the significant and
20 unavoidable environmental impacts of the project, the Commission cannot approve the site
21 development or associated landscaping modifications.
22
23 Break: 7:18 p.m.
24 Reconvene: 7:31 p.m.
25
26 Planning Director Stump further elaborated on the Statement of Overriding Conditions in connection
27 with the significant and unavoidable impacts identified for Transportation and Traffic in the EIR:
28 • Most of the impacts identified for Transportation and Traffic in the EIR can be reduced to less
29 than significant with the incorporation of mitigation measures.
30 • Although mitigation measures have been identified for the following impacts, there are impacts
31 that remain significant and avoidable:
32 ■ Existing Plus Project Queuing Analysis, Impact 4.10-2, Implementation of the Project
33 would substantially increase potential traffic safety hazards by increasing the degree to
34 which an existing queuing backup would exceed available storage length.
35
36 Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 has been identified and would improve queuing conditions to
37 acceptable conditions. However, since the improvement required by Mitigation Measure
38 4.10-2 is unfunded and is not included as part of the City of Ukiah's Capital Improvement
39 Program it cannot be considered a legally feasible mitigation measure. Without the
40 required funding mechanism, impact 4.10-2 remains significant and unavoidable.
41
42 ■ Cumulative Analysis-Future 2030 Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service
43 Impact 4.10-4, Implementation of the Project would increase traffic volumes on area
44 roadways under cumulative conditions.
45
46 Mitigation Measure 4.10-4 has been identified and would result in acceptable conditions.
47 However, since the improvement required by Mitigation Measure 4.10-4 is unfunded and
48 is not included as part of the City of Ukiah's Capital Improvement Program it cannot be
49 considered a legally feasible mitigation measure. Without the required funding
50 mechanisms, impact 4.10-4 remains significant and unavoidable.
51
52 ■ Cumulative Analysis-Future 2030 Plus Project Queuing Analysis, Impact 4.10-5,
53 Implementation of the Project would substantially increase potential traffic safety hazards
54 by causing queuing backups that exceed, or by increasing the degree to which queuing
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 10
1 backs are projected to exceed, the available storage length under 2030 No Project
2 conditions.
3
4 Mitigation Measure 4.10-5 required the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.10-2.
5 However, since the improvement required by Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 is unfunded and
6 is not included as part of the City of Ukiah's Capital Improvement Program it cannot be
7 considered a legally feasible mitigation measure. Without the required funding
8 mechanism, impact 4.10-5 remains significant and unavoidable.
9
10 • The Caltrans January 25th letter expressed concern about the adequacy of the EIR and the City's
11 findings for making a determination of Overriding Considerations for the project's significant
12 impacts.
13 • A Statement of Overriding Consideration is required when the EIR identifies significant and
14 unavoidable environmental impacts associated with the project where the Commission must
15 determine whether or not the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
16 environmental effects of the project such that the adverse environmental effects may be
17 considered acceptable. To this end, the Commission is required to make findings (Statement of
18 Overriding Considerations) stating that the benefits of the project outweigh the significant and
19 unavoidable transportation and traffic impacts identified in the EIR.
20 • While Caltrans has expressed concerns about traffic mitigations and is not convinced that the
21 mitigations provided in the EIR were feasible/workable, they would like more information. Staff
22 has informed Caltrans they are working on more detailed design information and engineering
23 costs estimates for the project alternatives to determine 1) if the construction of the alternatives is
24 feasible and 2) if the alternatives are financially feasible. Caltrans is awaiting information from
25 staff.
26 • The other component to traffic/infrastructure improvements is funding. The Ukiah Redevelopment
27 Agency did sell bonds for projects that include the Redwood Business Park improvements,
28 Downtown Streetscape improvements, and Railroad Property cleanup.
29 • If the redevelopment agency was still in existence, the bond proceeds would be spent for the
30 project improvements, but since the agency was recently eliminated, it is uncertain whether or not
31 those bond proceeds can be spent on those projects. This issue of whether or not redevelopment
32 agency bond proceeds can be spent is evolving Statewide for those projects identified. There will
33 likely be some change/decision made in this regard.
34 • Staff has been in contact with the City's traffic consultant for the Walmart Expansion Project and
35 page 40 of the traffic circulation study that was done for the project and corresponding
36 Appendices of the EIR shows information about the number of trips attributable to existing traffic,
37 Walmart expansion traffic, the discount club/Costco traffic and for buildout of the AIP. Doing the
38 math, the City Engineer indicates the Walmart Expansion Project constitutes about 8.6% of the
39 overall traffic for the full buildout of the business park.
40
41 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:35 p.m.
42
43 Chuck Williams:
44 • Lives in the area and expressed concern about the amount of litter generated from Walmart
45 shoppers.
46 • It takes many phone calls to get Walmart to pick up abandoned shopping carts.
47 • Traffic in the area is a big problem. Is concerned about an increase in traffic that would result with
48 the Expansion Project.
49 • Has issue with the pollutants that come from vehicles in the Walmart parking lot and how Walmart
50 is to effectively capture runoff mixed with pollutants on site such that this water does not reach
51 culverts, streams and rivers.
52 • Supports that runoff from the parking lot be diverted into tree wells. In order to effectively
53 accomplish this tree wells would have to be planted in areas having a lower grade.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 11
1 • Suggests using riparian trees that can absorb larger amounts of water such as Willows,
2 Cottonwoods, Alders. Excess water that is not absorbed by the tree wells and/or vegetation would
3 go into filters and then out into the culverts.
4 • Recommends using a hardy groundcover such as Santa Barbara Sedge that is drought tolerant
5 and would be effective in cleaning up parking lot vehicle pollutants by way of its root system.
6
7 Second speaker(inaudible)
8
9 Susan Knopf addressed three issues concerning Statement of Overriding Considerations:
10 • The EIR addressed the increasing number of police calls to the Airport Industrial Park (AIP) since
11 Walmart was built. It is anticipated with an expanded store and expanded hours of operation that
12 there will be more police calls. The EIR does not address why Walmart is such a magnet for
13 criminal activity and indicates no mitigation is necessary in this regard. Ukiah is experiencing
14 cutbacks in public safety and is of the opinion the potential for increased number of police calls
15 with the Expansion Project is an issue that needs to be looked at.
16 • In terms of economic considerations, a large percentage of Walmart profits leave the community.
17 Research in communities that have Walmart stores indicate that they have suffered economic
18 losses as a result. Has noted there is more retail/commercial space available since Walmart has
19 been in Ukiah. With the Expansion Project does anticipate that other business in the community
20 will fail.
21 • The proposed Project adds so much more pollution as a result of noise and light impacts that
22 have not been adequately addressed. There will be polluted runoff and heat generated into the
23 atmosphere from the parking lot.
24
25 Ike Heinz:
26 • To expand Walmart would not be favorable for Ukiah. A Walmart store already exists.
27 • Allowing for an Expanded Project would divide rather than unite the community.
28 • It would be nice if Walmart were serious about putting sidewalks in.
29 • The landscaping could be really improved. There is so much land that is compacted and is not
30 useful. This can be changed by beautifying the area with landscaping.
31 • Does not support the Walmart Expansion Project. It is fine that certain people like to shop at
32 Walmart.
33 • Addressed traffic problems in the area and supports exploring alternative methods as possible
34 solutions.
35 • Is opposed to having Walmart open 24-hours a day, seven days a week. There is not so much
36 business activity during late night hours.
37 • As opposed to tearing down what already exists to provide for an even larger false economy,
38 improve the existing building and site.
39
40 Mary McClanahan-Calvert
41 • Questioned project consistency with the Ukiah General Plan and cited examples: GP-1,
42 Promote, attract or assist in developing businesses, particularly those that add value to
43 resources already found or processed in the Ukiah Valley, GP-24, Conserve and enhance the
44 natural beauty of the Ukiah Valley, GP-28, Make Ukiah a leader in the development of
45 responsible resource-conserving ways of living and doing business, giving the fullest
46 consideration to the impacts of our actions on future generations, and those General Plan
47 goals/policies that pertain to responsible use of water and other natural resources that Ukiah
48 has. Does not see how further development of Walmart is going to demonstrate consistency with
49 any of the goal/policies/objectives provided for in the Ukiah General Plan.
50 • The major streets in the vicinity where Walmart is located are already congested and heavily
51 impacted. The Expansion Project would only add to the traffic problems.
52 • Referred to literature about Walmart stores in other areas that caused businesses to close and
53 further contributed to a declining/deteriorating local economy.
54 • Is of the opinion that many of the issues/environmental impacts identified in the EIR were not
55 adequately addressed or successfully mitigated.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 12
1 • The project appears to generate more negative aspects for the community than positive.
2
3 Douglas Volz:
4 • Thanked the Commission for their service to the community.
5 • We live in a time where there is great progress. Every time one turns around there is something
6 new and different and Walmart provides a lot of this.
7 • Does not support Walmart practices and will not shop there.
8 • Is expansion really progress? Is going with progress the right thing to do?
9 • It may be we, as a community, should stop and reconsider what the community is giving up in the
10 process of taking on a project that in the long run would not be of value to the community. Our
11 quality of life is what will be affected with the Expansion Project.
12 • The concern is how much the Expansion Project is going to provide to the community really of
13 value in terms of what the community already has. Ukiah already has 24-hour shopping centers.
14 • Is concerned with approving the Expansion Project and risking other stores going out of business.
15 • This community has a Walmart, which satisfies the shopping needs for many people.
16 • There appears to be so many adverse reasons for not allowing the Walmart Expansion Project to
17 occur.
18
19 Che Guevara:
20 • Elaborated on the practices of Walmart of purchasing goods from sources that use cheap labor to
21 manufacture products in very poor working conditions and standards.
22 • Asked the Commission to consider what Walmart really stands for and if the negative
23 repercussions are really worth allowing for an expanded superstore.
24 • Shopping at Walmart is a personal choice and he has no problem with people shopping at
25 Walmart.
26 • When Walmart proposes to expand, it implements harsh economic conditions upon the
27 community.
28 • Do you think the Waltons really care about Ukiah? No, they want maximum profits by any means
29 necessary regardless of how they strip people of a making a decent wage.
30 • Approval of the Expansion Project will result in thousands of dollars lost for the building of roads.
31 • Approval will impact our local economy and contribute to a subsequent loss of leadership
32 because Walmart will take their profits out of the community and do what they essentially want to
33 at the expense of the community.
34 • Does not agree that private corporations can take local tax money to build and/or make
35 improvements to roads for them.
36 • When is Walmart going to have enough? Will this corporation ever stop growing? Will Walmart's
37 hunger for money ever be satisfied? Is Walmart so hungry for money that it needs to expand in
38 Ukiah?
39 • Walmart wants to take over Ukiah.
40 • Walmart should operate in the real world and offer living wages and benefits for its employees.
41 • An expanded Walmart is not realistic and/or good for Ukiah.
42 • Asked the decision makers not to give Walmart the chance to impose monopoly capitalism or
43 proposed cyclical consumerism on `our home' because Walmart culture is not Ukiah culture. The
44 people of Ukiah deserve something better than a big box store ruining our businesses and lives.
45
46 Vicki Kitterman:
47 • Is not against the Walmart store. Is against the Expansion.
48 • Expressed concern regarding the Expansion Project with regard to traffic impacts and possible
49 job loss resulting from other store closures.
50 • Is a Lucky's store employee and is concerned she will lose her job of 24 years if Walmart is
51 allowed to expand.
52 • Makes a great living wage and is able to support her daughter and home by herself.
53 • Has good medical benefits.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 13
1 • Was disconcerting to hear the Ukiah Walmart Manager could not be able to address or answer
2 questions about his employees.
3 • The Manager of Lucky's store knows his employees and is willing to help in any way he can.
4 • Cannot afford to lose her living wage job. Does not want to be on public assistance.
5
6 Bill Durham:
7 • Is a member of The Direct Action Committee—Occupy Ukiah.
8 • Apologizes to speaking with his back to the community. Does not approve of the protocol for
9 speaking during public hearings in the Council Chambers.
10 • Thanked City staff for doing a lot of hard work on a very complex issue.
11 • Wanted to respectfully remind the Commission and City staff that fundamentally your job is to
12 protect the lives, health, safety, property, and economic prosperity of the citizens of Ukiah. Based
13 only on this, you should reject the project.
14 • Walmart pays some of the lowest wages in the retail industry and that is a concrete verifiable fact
15 and not conjuncture on anyone's part.
16 • To put this in perspective, if Walmart's profits were equally distributed among their employees
17 each employee would receive about$400,000 a year and/or$200 an hour.
18 • Regarding minimum wage and Walmart wages, minimum wage in 1968 peaked to $1.60, which
19 by today's standards is worth $10.43 an hour.
20 • Has a friend who is a fourth year apprentice in the sheet metal union and is paid $34 an hour plus
21 benefits. A Journeyman in this same profession makes $37 an hour plus benefits. These are
22 realistic wages, a living wage.
23 • Reminded City staff and Commission that in 13 years Walmart could not come through with a
24 sidewalk. With this being said, are we going to trust this corporation on all of the other things
25 being requested of them or what they are proposing to do. Does not think this is wise?
26 • One of the members of The Direct Action Committee asked a Walmart employee at the last
27 meeting if he/she were getting paid to attend. The response was he/she is finishing off one's shift.
28 • Wanted to add that the `99% movement stands in solidarity with Walmart workers.' The
29 Organization has no problem with Walmart workers. People do what they have to do to take care
30 of themselves and their families.
31 • Wants to implore members of the Commission to do their own research about Walmart. Study
32 after study has shown Walmart is bad for our community or bad for communities.
33 • Is against Walmart as a corporation and other predatory corporations like them.
34
35 Robert Werra:
36 • Is a semi-retired local family physician.
37 • His comments regarding the Statement of Overriding Consideration are social in nature and
38 pertain to healthcare.
39 • Objects to the inclusion of space for future optical services and space for a medical office.
40 • Professionals in the optical industry and medical physicians are opposed to this component of the
41 Expansion Project for the reasons that these proposals are 1) detrimental competition to existing
42 and potential future healthcare professionals in our town. This type of business scenario may
43 work in metropolitan areas, but not in a rural low-income area like Ukiah where it is really difficult
44 to attract primary care physicians. To have another competitor that exists to take `all the easy
45 stuff' is the kind of thing that makes it very difficult for a family physician to continue to work here
46 or come here. 2) Pertains to quality. The America Family Physicians organization that represents
47 about 90,000 family physicians in the US opposes this type office in a Walmart store or in other
48 similar type of business or service because this is poor quality healthcare. Such office visits are
49 fragmented and is basically not good healthcare. This is a time when physicians want to
50 combine/uniform their medical specialties under one primary care medical group. Allowing for a
51 medical office in a Walmart fragments that concept.
52 • Presently works at the night clinic for Urgent Care. This healthcare group incorporates many
53 physicians and nurse practitioners that are accompanied/supervised by physicians and in a
54 position to better meet the public's healthcare needs as opposed to receiving healthcare in a
55 fragmented approach in a Walmart store or the like. The latter represents poor healthcare.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 14
1 • Is cognizant that other people desire to speak so he will provide written materials on receiving
2 healthcare in Walmart stores and the like.
3 • Is very dismayed/bothered that physicians like himself receive emails in the form of
4 proposals/bids for service from corporations like Walmart asking if they/he would be interested in
5 providing this kind of healthcare service in their retail establishments. The email went on to list all
6 the types of healthcare this company would like to provide/deliver in the future with the underlying
7 statement that the establishment really wants to be the primary healthcare provider of primary
8 healthcare in the United States. This is very frightening.
9 • It is time to say `no' to Walmart. Walmart should stick to selling products and stay out of the
10 healthcare business.
11 • Does anyone want to go to Walmart for their healthcare needs? This represents `crummy'
12 medicine.
13 • It is time to speak up and tell Walmart unconditionally, `no medical office and no optical office in
14 the Ukiah Walmart store.'
15
16 Derek Estep:
17 • Observes that Walmart customers also shop at Food Maxx.
18 • Is of the opinion that if a Walmart supercenter is approved, people will not shop at Food Maxx
19 and will stay at Walmart. This could put Food Maxx, Lucky's, Grocery Outlet and other grocery
20 stores in jeopardy of going out of business.
21 • Allowing for optical care and medical offices in Walmart could be detrimental to the Downtown.
22 Unlike larger communities where having optical care and medical offices in retail establishments
23 may be acceptable this would not be acceptable to a rural and unique area like Ukiah. Ukiah
24 would then be no longer unique.
25 • Recognizes that small businesses are important to communities.
26 • Keep Ukiah unique.
27
28 Greg Simsik:
29 • Recently moved to Ukiah.
30 • Travels a lot for his job. When in the Tracy California area observed that Food Maxx was closed
31 and then realized Walmart was creating a supercenter in Tracy.
32 • What are the consequences of allowing Walmart to expand? How many grocery stores in Ukiah
33 will go out of business? How many good paying jobs will be lost as a result? How many homes
34 will likely be foreclosed upon because of businesses closing?This is a very big concern.
35 • Emphasized the importance of looking at the project and whether or not it is good for Ukiah. It
36 was not for Tracy.
37
38 Wes Canby:
39 • One of best crime deterrents is lighting. The more lighting the less crime a community has.
40 • The height of light poles is significant.
41 • The traffic problems in and around the Redwood Business Park have been in existence for a long
42 time. A solution may be to make a southbound exit further down from Walmart. Is of the opinion
43 the southbound exit creates the most problems and presents the most danger.
44 • History tells us that if we do not grow and progress, we, as a community, go backwards.
45
46 Miroslav Masek:
47 • Is a Walmart associate.
48 • Allowing Walmart to expand would benefit the community.
49 • Walmart treats their employees well and listed many of the benefits offered to employees,
50 provided information about career/advancement opportunities and other information/types of
51 benefits that employees have or can choose from, such as scholarships, children discounts,
52 discounts that are offered to employees for hotels, car rentals, phone service, and information
53 about job transfers, retirement and retirement accounts, and more.
54 • Supports the Expansion Project.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 15
1 Linda Gray:
2 • It is obvious Walmart is aware of the traffic problems that will be created with the Expansion
3 Project.
4 • Instead of supplying the funding to successfully mitigate the traffic impacts before the Expansion
5 Project, City staff is asking the Commission to adopt a Statement of Overriding Conditions for
6 those environmental impacts that are significant and unavoidable and cannot be mitigated. If this
7 is allowed, the citizens of this community will have to pay for the traffic improvements.
8 • There will likely be an increase in traffic accidents as a result of the Expansion Project.
9 • It appears the goal of Walmart is to reap the financial benefits of the community and externalize
10 the costs when possible.
11 • Asked the Commission not to adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the
12 Expansion Project.
13
14 Terry Silky:
15 • Directed all comments to the Ukiah General Plan goals/policies and Vision Statement objectives
16 for the City of Ukiah relative to economic and social benefits. The Walmart Expansion Project
17 contradicts the economic benefit in the areas of being able to provide for a strong and stable
18 community in an economy that uses resources and natural resources wisely and responsibly. In
19 terms of social benefits, `provide for a development that complements rather than compromises
20 the beauty of the Valley.' There is nothing beautiful about the Walmart Project and therefore,
21 contradicts this benefit.
22 • The Vision/Mission Statement says a project should:
23 - `Promote a high quality of life.' Is of the opinion Walmart does not do this.
24 - `A community living intelligently within our limits and harmony with natural processes.'
25 There is nothing harmonious about a 24 hour store operation.
26 - `We believe in an ecological and sustainable community rather than needless
27 consumption and waste.' Commented, `cheap companies in China, need I say more.'
28 • The issues of increased noise and traffic impacts resulting from the project have been addressed.
29 • It is her understanding the grocery store component was denied for the original project and
30 recommended this be reviewed. History should be served in this regard.
31 • The General Plan says Ukiah's vision is to:
32 - Promote, attract or assist in developing businesses particularly those that add value to
33 resources already found.
34 - Support local goods and services not imports. Commented, 'once again cheap crap
35 made in China.'
36 - Promote local ownership of businesses in order to keep capital growth within the
37 community. Commented, 'Would like to see how Walmart can really address that
38 condition.'
39 • We are the County of non-GMOs. What about when Walmart endorses the labeling of GMO
40 foods? Does not believe Walmart wants to be a part of the Mendocino Food Policy Council.
41
42 Madelin Holtkamp:
43 • Also thought Walmart was denied a grocery store for the initial project. For that project, there
44 were three conditions: 1) No grocery store 2) Comply with building, design standards 3) Provide
45 for tree shade coverage to a certain ratio in the parking lot. Would like clarification.
46 • Supports what other people have said about the long-term costs of this problem being transferred
47 to citizens.
48 • Recommended a good web site for the Commission to review at their leisure, Wider Opportunities
49 for Women.' They have a very good program to actually determine what is a living wage in your
50 community. One can actually find out what it actually costs people to live here by looking at rents,
51 healthcare costs, grocery costs for a normal-sized family and other associated living costs.
52 • It is important that taxpayers do not absorb any costs of wages below living wage. If people earn
53 below a living wage, they are eligible for public services, i.e., food stamps, HUD subsidies, school
54 lunches, Medi-Cal and those sorts of things.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 16
1 Dr.Jeanine Pfeiffer:
2 • Is a professor at San Jose State University. Also, an instructor for a college core course at the
3 City of Ten Thousand Buddha's.
4 • Is a consultant to the County and has participated in different conflicting policies where
5 constituents had varying views.
6 • Is sympathetic with the range and diversity of issues that are presented here.
7 • We are asking our Planning Commission to look beyond the short-term gains and look at what a
8 long-term expansion of Walmart or of any export-oriented business would do to our community.
9 • Questions what our community is going to look like in five, 10 or 15 years.
10 • Supports formulating a plan that harmonizes/coincides/complements Ukiah's Vision Statement.
11 • Reviewed Ukiah's Mission Statement on the City's website as to what constitutes our Vision
12 Statement. Apparently, a number of community groups assembled and spent a long time figuring
13 out what that is.
14 • Given the goal/objectives of the Ukiah General Plan, the Planning Commission's `charge' is to
15 ensure that that Vision Statement and the codes within the General Plan are adhered to.
16 • As a researcher, finds it very difficult to see how a Walmart Expansion Project fits into that
17 General Plan and trusts the Commission will make a really good decision for its citizens and not
18 just for the short-term, but rather for the long-term.
19 • Left a very high paying position on the east coast to move to Mendocino County and is doing
20 everything she can to stay in Mendocino County when it would make sense to take a position
21 somewhere else.
22 • Is paying back student loans so she is on a limited income. She would never shop at Walmart
23 because it is not cost effective for her. Cost effectiveness is purchasing items of need at a thrift
24 store.
25 • Happened to speak to a former Walmart employee who had to quit because of the way the cash
26 register was set/situated. It was so uncomfortable ergonomically that her body could not do the
27 work anymore. Compared to other businesses, especially local businesses, we have an employer
28 that does not offer the same decent suite of not just benefits, but basic working conditions that
29 enable our citizens to work comfortably and healthfully. Why in the world would we want to
30 support that type of thing?
31
32 Peter Good:
33 • Thanked staff and the Commission for doing all the work on the Expansion Project.
34 • Is not a supporter of the Walmart Expansion Project.
35 • Is not against Walmart employees. Does not think anyone is against people who work at
36 Walmart.
37 • Commented on the draft findings for the Statement of Overriding Considerations of which there
38 were several mentioned in the 'lawyer's' letter to this effect that says:
39 - The project will create diverse employment opportunities within the City, that it will create
40 85 new jobs. It will not create diverse employment by expanding the store. It will perhaps
41 create 85 new full or part-time jobs, but it also might have the effect of other stores
42 closing so the net effect may not be 85 jobs at all.
43 - The project will generate tax revenue for the City. First of all, it appears that the
44 information in the EIR is wrong. What is stated is Walmart will generate general fund
45 revenue of $44,000 annually. What the thinking was is that Walmart will generate
46 $45,000 worth of costs in the City by way of services for police and fire so the net the City
47 will receive is $44,000. This is a very small amount in a 16 million dollar budget and this
48 is only their projections. Projections are projections. Walmart may not earn that much. It
49 may be the costs will be more than what is anticipated. $44,000 does not get you far.
50 - The project will contribute to and fund needed infrastructure. Walmart's proportional fair
51 share for the transportation-impact fee is $17,800. This is a small amount of money for
52 Walmart and for the City. The project does not provide any money to speak of in this
53 regard. It is really not a benefit.
54 - The project will provide a high quality of development design that will be pedestrian
55 friendly. It certainly will be more friendly than what is there with what is being proposed.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 17
1 - Walmart has some sidewalks, but the fact remains there is no access from State Street
2 and no wheelchair access from State Street to the Airport Business Park. There is no
3 access on Hastings Road or Airport Road. Walmart, 18 years ago promised to provide for
4 access for pedestrians and disabled persons and did not do it. The pedestrian and the
5 disabled have suffered all these years because of this. Is sure there are many able-
6 bodied persons that can easily walk through the no-sidewalk area whereas if one is in a
7 wheelchair, has a baby in a stroller, is an older person or a person walking with children,
8 he/she cannot safely access Walmart from Washington Avenue, Hastings Road and/or
9 Airport Road. One cannot access Walmart safely from Talmage Road either. It may be
10 pedestrian friendly once a person gets to Walmart, but not getting there.
11 - The project will be energy-conservation conscious. Even though this approach might help
12 global warming, the question is will this help the bottom line of the Walmart Corporation
13 so it is good for them.
14 - The project will provide attractive landscaping. Madelin Holtkamp was right when she
15 indicated that was agreed to by way of landscaping for the original project was changed.
16 All one has to do is look at the landscaping at Home Depot that came much later and see
17 that the trees are bigger and the landscaping is so much better. Is hopeful sidewalks will
18 be implemented as was initially agreed to.
19 - As for bicycle circulation, what will occur is to put some stripes on the existing road.
20 There will be no extra room for a bicycle. The area where Walmart is located is not a
21 good place to ride a bicycle.
22 - Will make no comment on the topic of storm water treatment.
23 - With regard to 24-hour shopping, this will increase costs for the Ukiah Police Department.
24 - 'The project will be a stabilizing influence in the City's retail market section.' This may be
25 true. The stabilizing influence is that other retail establishments will be gone and Walmart
26 will be there.
27 - `The project will be a good member of the community.' That is a completely subjective
28 statement. According to the letter from the attorney, the whole project could be approved
29 just by saying Walmart is a good member of the community.
30 - The Statement of Overriding Considerations are very weak, especially given the
31 seriousness of the traffic situation that the Walmart Expansion would create.
32
33 Thomas Ray:
34 • Provided written comments that are herein incorporated into the minutes and referred to as
35 attachment 1.
36 • Stated his concern that the costs to the City of Ukiah for the expansion of Walmart will greatly
37 exceed what the City will get back from Walmart.
38 • Supposedly Ukiah would get extra tax money because of the Expansion Project.
39 • It has been independently calculated that the City of Ukiah will only get$12,000 to $15,000 a year
40 in extra tax money. Is of the opinion the City should really check into this and that the wrong
41 formula was used relative to what they get back from sales tax from the State.
42 • The recently completed Fort Bragg roundabout cost $4.4 million to complete. Ukiah's roundabout
43 may cost the same or more. Walmart stated they will only pay a proportional cost of this and
44 questioned why this is.
45 • Where is the City of Ukiah going to get the money to pay for the roundabout?
46 • If Walmart did not expand, the City of Ukiah would not have to build a roundabout in the first
47 place.
48 • Walmart's own EIR predicts that a new Walmart supermarket will take away $50 million a year
49 from existing Ukiah retailers.We will be trading good jobs for bad.
50 • The EIR predicts the possible closure of two grocery stores as a result of the expansion. Major
51 store closure will result in more people unemployed, home foreclosures and decreased property
52 values for homes and commercial properties located nearby those major stores.
53 • Walmart stated their health insurance is available for all employees. One should ask Ukiah
54 Walmart how many of their low-wage, full-time and part-time employees actually have health
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 18
1 insurance with Walmart. One will find out that many of them cannot afford it because of their low
2 wages.
3 • The hiring of new employees for the Expansion Project will only compound the problem. The City
4 of Ukiah has been subsidizing the healthcare costs of Walmart for years.
5 • Other California cities, including Antioch, Carlsbad, Chico, Clovis, Concord, Eureka, Folsom,
6 Hercules, Inglewood, North Auburn, Salinas, San Marcos, Turlock, Ventura and Woodland and
7 many other cities across the United States have stopped the building or expansion of Walmart
8 stores in their cities for the same reasons.
9 • The building or expansion of Walmart in their cities did not really benefit them or local businesses.
10 It only increased Walmart's share and profit thus taking away from already established local
11 businesses and jobs. The City of Ukiah should stop Walmart as well. It cannot afford the
12 expansion of Walmart.
13
14 Ernie Olson:
15 • We have heard several people tell us about the good working for Walmart at $12 per hour.
16 According to a recent issue of Consumer Report that surveyed their readers on big chain stores,
17 the best big box stores in the United States are ranked as follows: Cosco, Kohl's, JC Penney,
18 ...... and the bottom three include Sam's Club, Kmart, and Walmart. 26,000 people were
19 surveyed.
20 • Walmart was the only big box store earning below average scores on the quality of the men's,
21 women's and children's clothing. In other words, people are buying cheap clothes so one gets
22 what he/she pays for. According to the article, Walmart had three times as many returns of
23 unsatisfactory merchandise as Costco had. The article also mentioned the $12 per hour wage.
24 This is a long way from a living wage. A living wage buys people a home, a new car about every
25 10 years, sends children to school, allows people to purchase insurance and have vacations. This
26 is not going to happen with a $12 per hour wage.
27 • Shops at Lucky's occasionally. Buys all of his meat at Lucky's. They probably have the best meat
28 market in town and is going to miss them when they are gone.
29 • Owns real estate in the neighborhood to the north of Lucky's. It is low income housing. Many of
30 the persons living in this neighborhood walk to Lucky's. These people will be out of luck when
31 Lucky's is forced to close. Good living wage jobs are going to be lost.
32
33 Dannett Hiatt:
34 • Has attended two of the Walmart Expansion Project meetings and listened to endless criticisms
35 about Walmart. Most of the information has been acquired via the internet.
36 • Is curious if any of these people actually tried to talk to a Walmart associate and find how`we'feel
37 about working for the company?
38 • Has always taught not to believe everything you hear or read. Most of the sites are also anti-
39 Walmart so, of course, all a person is going to get is negative or derogatory information.
40 • Suggests these people step away from their computers and get their information the old-fashion
41 way, person-by-person.
42 • Has heard over and over how a high percentage of Walmart associates have to rely on
43 government assistance because they do not make a sufficient wage.
44 • Guarantees they are not the only employer whose employees are on the system. In the 15-plus
45 years she has been employed with Walmart, has never used nor required government
46 assistance.
47 • Walmart offers various affordable insurance benefits. Has to take three medications that only cost
48 her $4 a month. Has been told by local dentists that she has one of the better dental coverages
49 around.
50 • Has four weeks paid vacation per year, plus sick time, which accumulates each pay period as
51 well as personal time. Walmart associates are eligible for quarterly bonuses, which we qualify for
52 almost every time.
53 • Over the past few years, as the economy has deteriorated, businesses, as well as County and
54 City governments have laid people off, cut wages, and/or terminated job positions altogether. My
55 job as well as those of co-workers has remained intact.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 19
1 • In the 15-plus years she has been employed with Ukiah Walmart, there have been a lot of people
2 who sought employment. Believes Walmart has had well over 5,000 people employed at one time
3 or another and for different reasons such as the need to supplement income while furthering their
4 education, going to school so that people can pursue their careers, wanting a temporary job
5 through the holiday season for extra money or for people, like herself, who had no idea where
6 they wanted to go with their lives.
7 • Started working at Wamart at age 18 and found stability by working hard to achieve promotions
8 and now has made her career with Walmart. Is very proud to work at Walmart.
9 • Keeps hearing we do not need another grocery store. Do we really need three Starbucks and
10 open one right after another?
11 • Having another grocery store is an actual benefit. It will bring competition, which will drive the
12 current outrageous food prices down that will save families money particularly during these
13 economic hard times.
14 • Supports the Walmart Expansion Project, not only because she is an associate, but because she
15 is a consumer. As a single mother, she has to make every cent stretch.
16 • Purchases her basic household needs at Walmart because the prices are lower. What dry food,
17 frozen and dairy products that are available are much cheaper at Walmart.
18 • Presently, it is all about saving money and is of the opinion the Walmart Expansion Project will
19 definitely do that.
20 • Someone made the comment about Walmart associates being paid to be at the Planning
21 Commission public hearings and acknowledged this is true because this is a Walmart-related
22 function. Walmart associates are paid for everything like that.
23 • Regarding parking and the sharing of a parking lot, she goes to work five days a week and
24 observes the parking lot where Staples is located is always empty. What is the `big deal' about
25 sharing a parking lot?
26 • Regarding having another store open 24 hours a day, noted Safeway and other fast food
27 establishments are open 24/7.
28
29 Sandra Whilhite:
30 • Mendocino County is growing and will continue to grow as long as there are children and
31 grandchildren and these people need jobs.
32 • Does not see that Mendocino County has enough jobs for people who want to live here. Does
33 not see industry coming in. This County has lost Masonite and other significant and important
34 businesses that are not being replaced.
35 • The Walmart Expansion Project will provide jobs and help meet some of the needs for people in
36 this community.
37 • Recalls what it was like to live on welfare where she had to go on the Indian Reservation to get
38 food from the government and the experience was terrible. The system has changed since then
39 and is better. Would rather work than be on welfare.
40 • Takes pride in her position at Walmart. If she had to leave her job and do the same job
41 somewhere else, she would lose a lot of pay. She makes $12.50 per hour working at Walmart
42 and is proud of that wage. She pays for family health insurance.
43 • Many of her family members got their start at Walmart and have gone on to do better. Her son is
44 graduating from college this summer and he got his start in the Ukiah Walmart store.
45 • We need jobs to help people to move up and onto better things.
46
47 Dorothea Dorman:
48 • Provided written comments that are herein incorporated into the minutes and referred to as
49 attachment 2.
50 • Brings up the issue about how damaging Walmart stores are in the long run to any city, to any
51 city they take over.
52 • Spoke to the matter that 50 to 75 years ago the Ukiah Valley was a beautiful place that had a
53 valley floor covered with deep blue lupines and golden poppies. Today, one cannot find wildflower
54 seeds to collect and replant.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 20
1 • Every city in this county has been bulldozed, paved and so much of the natural areas are dead.
2 We have very little wildlife in our cities. Songbirds are gone and dying. Pollution is destroying the
3 quality of life. The process is badly skewed and backwards. The process should begin with the
4 community asking whether or not we need another grocery store. Do we need apples from China
5 that are supposed to be organic? Noted a local apple grower could not sell his apples on this side
6 of the mountain because Walmart brought in apples that were supposed to be organic, from
7 China?
8 • Was informed that Walmart sells wood stoves right at the beginning of the cold season and as
9 soon as the season is over they are pulled from the store. Some of these stoves needed
10 maintenance and were not well constructed. Walmart provided no maintenance whatsoever so
11 people were stuck with stoves that no one could fix.
12 • Walmart has a terrible record and this has been made known by other people speaking about the
13 project.
14 • Supports a more visionary type of planning, not this incredibly boring, nitpicking over all the
15 environmental impacts and mitigations, many of which would be enormously costly to the
16 taxpayer to mitigate. Some of the impacts cannot be mitigated according to the EIR.
17 • Has issue with the EIR from the standpoint that the economic and fiscal portion of EIR document
18 was completed by a subconsultant whose real estate division of the company has business
19 affiliations with Walmart. Is of the opinion ethical standards should be applied to planning.
20 • Supports that Walmart improve the existing store. Walmart says they are going to put in energy-
21 conscious changes, skylights and other sustainable (green thinking) systems that would be good
22 for the community and environment.
23 • This community does not need an expanded Walmart to put other stores out of business.
24 • Other project features she supports include: planting and properly maintaining/caring for trees in
25 the parking lot, provide an adequate storm water treatment and draining program to address
26 runoff from the parking lot and building such as bio-swales and landscaping features for treatment
27 of storm water, provide for adequate pedestrian access and a `real' bicycle trail. Improvements
28 should be done and done right with what is existing.
29 • Walmart is an obscenely wealthy international corporation that gives very little back to the cities
30 that are eventually destroyed as a result.
31 • Supports asking Walmart to donate a million to 10 million dollars towards our community to offset
32 how much they take from here to go towards the building of a river park, a walking park with
33 bicycle trails, for restoration of our native wildflowers and in other ways that would improve our
34 community.
35
36 William Kopper:
37 • Is an attorney and represents Citizens for Sustainable Commerce, Steve Scalmanini, Alan
38 Nicholson, and Jeffrey Blankfort.
39 • Did provide some written comments at the January 25th Planning Commission meeting and
40 submitted these same comments because they were not included in the staff report for this
41 meeting and would like to share the comments with the Commission. This document is herein
42 incorporated into the minutes and referred to as attachment 3.
43 • Submitted a letter from Dr. Philip King, dated February 7 to be distributed and placed as a matter
44 of record. This document is herein incorporated in the minutes and referred to as attachment 4.
45 • The Issue being considered is whether or not the Commission should adopt the Statement of
46 Overriding Considerations.
47 • In the January 25t`' submittal there is a letter from Dan Smith, who is a traffic engineer and very
48 well respected. He founded DKS Traffic Engineers, a nationwide company. In this report he
49 explains why the roundabout solutions will not work at the Talmage Road — U S 101 Southbound
50 Off-ramp Interchange and Caltrans agrees with that. There is just not the space to make them
51 work. At the January 18 regular City Council meeting, he presented a Powerpoint presentation
52 that showed exactly why the roundabouts could not work. The City has to accept this as the
53 reality of the situation. Moving forward, there is no mitigation at the U S 101 Off-ramps. The EIR,
54 which has now been approved by the City Council, found that there is no feasible mitigation. So
55 when the Commission makes a consideration on the Statement of Overriding Considerations, you
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 21
1 cannot speculate about whether or not there might be some mitigations. There are no mitigations
2 so the Commission has to assume there are none. What the EIR found was that the situation is
3 serious enough. The EIR indicated that with the addition of the Walmart traffic and not other
4 traffic, the Southbound Off-ramp would back up to the very point where it intersects with the
5 freeway. There was substantial evidence presented by Mr. Smith and actually other
6 knowledgeable commenters that the traffic report completed for the project understated the
7 problem. The reason being was that the traffic counts were taken in February, which is historically
8 the lowest traffic month of the year for retail traffic and the fact the counts on U S 101 were much
9 lower in February than in other months and that if the traffic volumes had been reasonably
10 adjusted, then the traffic would in fact back up onto the freeway with such an adjustment.
11 • The County of Mendocino in a letter stated that under existing conditions the traffic on the
12 Southbound Off-ramps already backs up onto the freeway.
13 • In light of the problem, the Walmart Expansion Project is going to add 200 PM peak-hour trips to
14 what is already a very bad situation.
15 • At the January 18 Council meeting, there was a person who testified that her son had been killed
16 on an off-ramp in this area in such a backup.
17 • When considering a Statement of Overriding Considerations the Commission cannot just think
18 about some generic environmental impact whereby a close look at the seriousness of the impact,
19 as well as the benefits is necessary. The more serious the impact, the greater the benefits must
20 be before you can find that the weight of the benefits outweigh the impact. The impact in this
21 situation is very serious. The more traffic that goes through that particular off-ramp and
22 interchange, the greater the chance of a high-speed collision that could result in serious injury or
23 death. As Dan Smith stated in a letter that is attached to this January 25t" submittal letter, is that it
24 is his experience cities that do add traffic and do not mitigate to situations where there are known
25 impacts can become liable.
26 • Has asked this question before whether the City could be liable and clearly, if Caltrans approves
27 a design and there is an accident, `then they own it,' but if they do not and the City is adding
28 traffic then there is a possibility the City could be liable for the type of injuries that might occur.
29 • Again, it is very important the Commission consider the impact, the specific impact, not
30 something that is general.
31 • In terms of the benefits, and the January 13 communication from Amy Herman of ALH, she
32 indicated she made a mistake in her previous study and she was preparing a corrected study. In
33 this corrected study she found approximately that the economic benefit would be $42,000. In this
34 regard, her study included the January 13th study that provided for mathematical error. The
35 assumption she made is Walmart will divert 75 percent of its sales from other businesses in the
36 City of Ukiah, or in that area. So review of `General Merchandise' Ms. Herman multiplied that by
37 75 percent to get the potential taxable-sales diversions and did the same thing for food and motor
38 vehicles, but with other retail she did not use 75 percent and used a lower figure. When you use
39 75 percent, it increases the potential taxable-sales diversions and when you do that and you
40 correct the values for the sales tax, instead of having $42,000 as a potential benefit or$440,000,
41 the figure is actually $10,000. This does not, of course, include Measure S. which is another
42 $20,000 or the like. So for $10,000 more in revenue, you are taking the risk of somebody having
43 a serious, a very serious injury at this intersection because you are adding traffic to what is
44 already an unsafe situation.
45 • You have to think about this type of tradeoffs when you weigh the benefits of the project versus
46 the environmental impact.
47 • There has been a lot of testimony whether or not Walmart is good or bad. On one hand, you hear
48 about there being 85 new jobs created. There is no concrete evidence there are going to be 85
49 new net jobs because Ms. Herman's study concluded there was a reasonably good possibility
50 one or two grocery stores would be closed and so jobs would essentially be lost. Studies of
51 Walmart stores coming to communities generally show net jobs go down not up.
52 • There is no benefit in the landscaping because what is proposed does not meet City standards.
53 • There is improvement in bicycle circulation off-site.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 22
1 • Is of the opinion the Commission has to very carefully consider what the community is really
2 getting by considering the very very severe environmental problems and health and safety
3 problems associated with the project.
4
5 Serena Stanford
6 • Has been a Ukiah resident for 20 years.
7 • Appreciates the Planning Commission process and that the community is able to get involved
8 with projects and have a voice.
9 • Walmart is generous and very supportive of its employees.
10 • Did apply at several local grocery stores and basically would have had to begin as a cart pusher
11 or a bagger. She is not physically able to push carts. Walmart hires disabled people, retired
12 people and a person does not have to start at one of those positions to be an employee.
13 • Did not get a job at any of the grocery stores. Has worked at Walmart for seven years.
14 • Has been well taken care of.
15 • Was able to raise her sons and now they are in college.
16 • Is in a position now to do more and is ready to promote within the company.
17 • Walmart has integrity. For instance Walmart does not sell R-rated movies.
18 • About the 24-hour operation, many associates request different shifts so it works better for their
19 personallives.
20 • Does not have any problem with the Walton family. People should not `put down' anyone who is
21 successful. Sees nothing wrong in being successful. There is nothing wrong with Walmart being a
22 thriving company.
23 • Walmart offers opportunity and appreciates what this company stands for and does in the way of
24 customer service.
25
26 Debby Vinson:
27 • Thanked staff and the Commission for all of their hard work.
28 • There was a slide projection of Walmart showing some of the different associations this company
29 has helped. Two associations that were not mentioned include People First of Ukiah and ABC No
30 Barrier.
31 • Walmart has helped her disabled sister who belongs to People First of Ukiah.
32 • Walmart is really great about helping the community.
33 • If the bus stop was moved over to the east side of the AIP, it would be closer to the Regional
34 Center where many disabled persons go making it closer to get on the MTA bus, particularly for
35 those persons in wheelchairs.
36 • Is part of the civic beautification project for the Ukiah Garden Club. This club has been planting
37 wildflowers and other plants on Highway 101 and is in the process of starting to plant flowers and
38 such on Talmage Road. A plan will be initiated in this regard.
39 • Walmart participates in the picking up of Talmage Road by donating her time.
40 • A possible solution to the traffic problem is if Walmart is open 24 hours, it will relieve some of that
41 traffic because there are many people who will do their shopping at night.
42 • Is of the opinion should take the 8%, which is the proportional fair share percentage Walmart is
43 responsible for to help pay for road improvements.
44
45 Jeffrey Blankfort:
46 • One would think from all the public hearings I have attended on the Walmart Expansion Project it
47 would be about closing the store.
48 • Nobody has suggested closing the store.
49 • What it is about is whether or not the City is going to approve another full-service supermarket,
50 open 24 hours in a City awash with supermarkets, two of which already sell discount groceries.
51 • Solid arguments detailing the negative effects that approval of this project will have on the City
52 and residents of Ukiah have apparently not impacted your decision-making thus far in the
53 process. Staff and the Commission have acknowledged that as a Final EIR was obliged to admit,
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 23
1 there is no practical way to mitigate the horrendous and dangerous traffic conditions that will
2 ensue should the Commission approve the project.
3 • On behalf of the Committee for Sustainable Commerce, Dan Smith who Mr. Kopper mentioned, a
4 traffic engineer with 30 years experience and a graduate of UC Berkeley and Yale, did an
5 independent peer review analysis of the EIR traffic study, of which he assumes the Commission
6 has a copy.
7 • In addition to some of the technical issues that have previously been discussed, Mr. Smith
8 expressed concern about other aspects of this analysis, which is the potential liability that could
9 be assumed by the City.
10 • Mr. Smith pointed out that in the EIR the Commission found to be adequate has an obligation to
11 define feasible mitigation measures for the project's impacts. Since Mr. Smith, Caltrans and
12 Mendocino County all submitted their concerns about using roundabouts to solve the problem,
13 the EIR needs to either provide adequate information showing how these roundabouts would
14 operate or come up with another alternative.
15 • Instead, the EIR traffic consultant suggests that the design details of the roundabouts would be
16 worked out between Caltrans and the City at a later date.
17 • As Mr. Smith stated in his January 17th letter, in which staff and the Commission should have a
18 copy states, `The effort to postpone defining mitigation details until later constitute a deferral of
19 mitigation that is improper under CEQA.'
20 • In another letter, dated January 24th, Mr. Smith also suggested the City of Ukiah will likely take on
21 liability issues if the Planning Commission adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations and
22 approves the project under these circumstances. Mr. Smith wrote in his letter, `The safety issues
23 of the project's unmitigated traffic impacts are so adversely severe that no responsible
24 government could reasonably approve a project adding traffic to the impacted location.' He further
25 wrote, `Even though the impacted location, the Southbound Off-ramp from US 101 to Talmage
26 Road is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. By knowingly under findings of Overriding
27 Considerations approving a project that would add traffic that increases accident exposure and
28 severity at the impacted location, the City would and should incur liability for the consequences of
29 that increased accident exposure and hazard.'
30 • Any decision the Planning Commission makes on the issue has to take into consideration the
31 potential liability to the City if a serious accident occurs.
32 • Rather than expose the City to the risk, the Planning Commission should direct the applicant to
33 come up with a mitigation measure that actually works, if one actually exists, and the funding
34 mechanism that will enable these improvements to be completed prior to the completion of the
35 expansion.
36 • At the moment, as we are all aware, no such funding mechanism exists, nor is there likely to be
37 one in the near future.
38 • Given the economic needs of the people of Ukiah, opening an expansion there, improving the
39 traffic situation to benefit Walmart is not a priority for the citizens of Ukiah.
40 • Mr. Stump referred to a letter from Caltrans. A couple paragraphs read, `Based on the identified
41 deficiencies, we do not have confidence that the projecYs impacts have been adequately defined,
42 and we have significant remaining concerns that the appropriate traffic mitigation has not been
43 identified. As presented, the project will likely result in significant traffic impacts.' This means
44 accidents. `Including congestion and/or traffic safety impacts requiring a Statement of Overriding
45 Considerations. We (Caltrans) recommend that the City withhold approval of the project or
46 issuance of a building permit until feasible mitigation measures, with cost estimates to be
47 determined for both direct and cumulative impacts. We offer to assist the City to ensure that the
48 interests of the traveling public is served.'
49 • The letter is signed by Jesse Robinson, who is the Associate Transportation Planner of Caltrans
50 District 1.
51 • What we need to keep in mind is that with regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations
52 every public official of Ukiah is responsible for the health and safety and welfare of that
53 community, not the bottom line of predatory corporations.
54
55 Dennis Slota:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 24
1 • My personal experience in Chico in the early 1990s when their development got ahead of their
2 infrastructure was that he needed to come to a full stop at full speed on the highway due to ramps
3 overflowing on the highway.Was told in this regard that according to the EIR, there was adequate
4 storage in the ramps and that it will not extend into the highway. Now we are hearing the same
5 thing.
6 • The traffic count was conducted in February. For all intensive purposes, everyone knows what
7 the tourist season is like here. There is a huge difference in traffic on highway 101.
8 • The point with regard to the Chico example is that this is how it started out too. There are about
9 four ramps that routinely backed up and the whole ramp would be backed up. Is not sure of the
10 reason, but there must have been just one project that all of a sudden caused overflowing onto
11 the highway.
12 • It does not take much to reach that `critical mass' where a person suddenly has to come to a
13 dead stop. Does not recall the name of that highway, but it was not a major highway like U S
14 Highway 101 going from Mexico to Canada and it was not a major tourist area. It was local traffic
15 on that highway.
16 • A lot of people travel up and down the highway for different reasons and are not prepared to
17 come to a full stop on the highway because of a traffic ramp.
18 • Would like to reiterate one of`your' highest duties is towards public health and safety. The matter
19 of maintaining public safety trumps everything. Public safety should be very very high on your list
20 of concerns.
21 • Personally experienced what it is like to come to a stop on a highway. It is a very unsafe and
22 unpleasant experience and that is without fog or rain or bad weather. This was in Chico in the
23 summer. So there is the strong likelihood of accidents if this project is approved.
24 • Thanked the Commission for their community service.
25
26 Craig Davis:
27 • Is the Ukiah Walmart store manager.
28 • Has been with Walmart for 17 years.
29 • Has had opportunities given to him so with his hard work and dedication this led to some
30 promotions and finally store manager.
31 • It has been difficult to hear some of the comments and statements made during review of the
32 Walmart Expansion Project.
33 • Cares for each of his associates. He cares what they think and who they are.
34 • Many of his associates have worked for Walmart for 10, 15 years and even since the store
35 opened in 1994. Many have gone through the same career path he has and become supervisors.
36 Some of them have gone on to other communities and are store managers themselves.
37 • Well over 50% of the associates at the Ukiah Walmart store are full-time.
38 • The store expansion will bring many added jobs to this community. Controversy or not, they are
39 jobs. The expansion will also add construction revenue to this economy as well as the essential
40 sales tax, which we all know we need.
41 • The project will bring about a one-stop shopping opportunity for our local residents.
42 • Every day customers ask when Walmart is going to expand.
43 • Many of the customers are limited in that they have limited incomes and/or have mobility
44 difficulties. The one-stop shop will make it a good experience for them. It would provide for
45 access to affordable produce and food items. With the Commission's support, the Expansion
46 Project will give customers what they are looking for.
47 • At the Ukiah Walmart, we believe in our town. We have been here for a long time. We have given
48 back to the community a lot and in many different ways throughout the years.
49 • As you have heard earlier, Walmart has done many things in the past year to give back including
50 giving funding, help revenue, renovate the swimming pool, contribute to the funding of the food
51 bank's holiday drive and has donated to well over 50 organizations this past year alone.
52 • Walmart has also partnered with the Ukiah Main Street Program in an effort to make sure that we
53 are working together to bring people to the Downtown area.
54 • The Expansion Project will allow us to contribute even more to the community and offer more to
55 the community.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 25
1 • Encourages any one with questions to call him at Walmart and he would be happy to answer any
2 of those questions.
3 • Appreciates City staff and the Planning Commission for the work being done on this project.
4 • Asks the Commission to consider the benefits that we have talked about and support the project.
5
6 Break: 9:32 p.m.
7 Reconvene: 9:43 p.m.
8
9 Lou Tustin:
10 • Thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak in support of the Walmart Expansion
11 Project.
12 • Is a Walmart associate. Has been a resident and a homeowner in Ukiah for 35 years.
13 • Recalled some former employers that no longer exist in the community and they include
14 McGehee Equipment, Masonite, Motion Development Industries, Remco, Microphor and others.
15 • Worked everywhere to keep his family supported and after much downsizing, selling off, layoffs,
16 found himself unemployed at 60 years old. He went to work at Walmart and has had a good
17 experience working there. In 1995, he became ill, required three surgeries and was gone from
18 work for nine months. When he was well enough to come back, his job was waiting for him.
19 • Walmart has provided longevity and has been there for him. At 71 years of age, Walmart has not
20 asked him to leave. Walmart is trying to offer this opportunity to another 50 associates and is of
21 the opinion it would be a shame not to let them try.
22
23 Josh Lietz:
24 • Is employed at Walmart.
25 • Recently moved to Ukiah from several years of schooling in the IT field to be closer to his family.
26 • Because of the recent economic strain, was unable to find work in his related field.
27 • If it were not for a local Walmart, would likely have found himself in the unemployment line, like a
28 lot of Americans at this time.
29 • Despite his career change, Walmart has provided him with an opportunity and a competitive
30 wage that has allowed him to continue pursuing his desire to raise a family in this community.
31 With this being said, is taking an active interest in matters that affect our community.
32 • The most concerning issue related to the proposed Walmart Expansion is the traffic mitigation
33 problem on Talmage and U S Highway 101.
34 • It is his understanding the traffic is already a problem in that area regardless of what development
35 comes into that part of town.
36 • Also understands from previous meetings that continued growth and expansion are already
37 expected for this area and agrees with that desire the City has.
38 • Ukiah needs the growth and revenue to survive and to flourish. However, the current traffic
39 problem does not have adequate funding at this time.
40 • As with the original addition of Walmart to this community, Walmart once again is prepared to
41 contribute substantially to the necessary funding needed to properly address the traffic concerns
42 at the Talmage Road and 101 intersection, of which, Walmart is responsible for only about 8.6 %
43 of that. 91% of that could be delegated to other businesses and traffic that already exist in the
44 community.
45 • As a husband and father, is concerned as another member in the community about the safety of
46 those having to use these roadways. The proposed Expansion Project is a positive solution to the
47 current traffic mitigation concerns.
48 • Walmart was founded on three basic beliefs, beliefs that he believes by their nature transcend our
49 business and should be carried by every individual regardless of where one stands on the issue
50 of the Expansion: Respect for the individual, strive for excellence, and service to our customers.
51 A gentleman spoke about a Walmart employee being paid to attend the Planning Commission for
52 the Walmart Expansion Project and that employee was he. He was finishing out his shift. In order
53 to attend the meeting, he had to take time away from duties and responsibilities of Walmart to
54 accommodate the meeting in the interest of what he felt was the greater need for our company
55 and community.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 26
1 • Believes in respect for the individual unlike the disrespect that he was given by the individual who
2 presented secondhand information as facts referring to the individual who spoke about a Walmart
3 employee being paid to attend the Planning Commission. Striving for excellence, which he
4 believes to go personally above and beyond his duty as an employee. He is not, was not hired to
5 represent Walmart in a public setting. He believes in striving for service to the customer as other
6 Walmart associates picked up the slack in his absence to continue service to customers when he
7 was not able to perform his normal duties.
8 • Understands that emotions run high about the Expansion Project and is personally growing
9 exceedingly weary of the passionate and gross misrepresentation of the facts and intentions that
10 are surrounding the Project. He gives people respect until they give him a reason not to. Is asking
11 for the same and pure ethical professional treatment from those who may have a difference of
12 opinion than he does.
13 • Is hopeful people can get past the anger, the ignorance, and the arrogance and that the
14 Commission weighs the facts in making the decision to support this Expansion.
15
16 Ed Nieves:
17 • Provided written comments that are herein incorporated into the minutes and referred to as
18 attachment 5.
19 • Is the coordinator for the Mendocino Environmental Center.
20 • Addressed the Planning Commission and stated the Mendocino Environmental Center wishes on
21 behalf of its members to once again state its opposition to the proposed expansion of the Ukiah
22 Walmart store.
23 • The Mendocino Environmental Center was started as a direct result of Walmart's proposal to
24 build its store and the City of Ukiah's approval of a Negative Declaration on the original plan. The
25 founding members filed a lawsuit that led to the development of an EIR on that original plan.
26 • The Mendocino Environment Center opposed approval of the current EIR for this plan to expand
27 on the grounds that it is inadequate, not having addressed Caltrans' concerns regarding the
28 appropriateness of the proposed traffic mitigations. Caltrans' letter, dated January 25, 2012 states
29 specifically that the Department of Transportation recommends the City withhold approval of the
30 project.
31 • The inability of Walmart or the City to successfully mitigate the traffic hazards should be enough
32 reason for this body to not approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
33 • The Mendocino Environmental Center members are also concerned with the State Water Quality
34 Control Board's exception to this plan. We continue to be concerned with the issues of safety,
35 noise air and water pollution, as well as further economic blight to our community.
36 • The members ask the Planning Commission not approve the Statement of Overriding
37 Consideration on this project and that the Commission instead approve the statement of
38 overriding concerns being those of the citizens of Ukiah and hold those concerns to be greater
39 than any economic consideration for a multinational corporation.
40 • Has been at the intersection southbound and was involved in an accident when there was very
41 little traffic and where the person behind him was not traveling very fast. This person happened to
42 be on a cell phone. Had this person been traveling faster, he might have been pushed out onto
43 Talmage Road because he was stopped at that intersection.
44 • When traveling to Talmage especially when one leaves Gobbi Street, there are times when it is
45 not a hazard, but then there are times when there is traffic, trucks and otherwise that are coming
46 at a fast clip/pace and one has to pick up speed to get out onto the freeway and then get back
47 onto the off-ramp.
48 • If one has ever done this, one knows that he/she is moving pretty quickly coming off that ramp.
49 That ramp is a danger now. Approval of this project will make it more so. Wants the Commission
50 to consider that.
51
52 Penny Vinson:
53 • Likes Walmart and supports the Expansion Project.
54
55 Pascal Milon:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 27
1 • Shops at Walmart three or four times a week by riding his bicycle and never experiences any
2 traffic problems.
3 • Supports approval of the Expansion Project.
4
5 Terry Poplawski:
6 • Is a resident of Ukiah and an organizer of the Mendocino County Coalition of union members.
7 • Is of the opinion the general Statement of Overriding Consideration is that Walmart, as a
8 corporation, has denied the right of all of its employees to belong to a union.
9 • Specifically, for an overriding consideration on this project, the approval will allow Walmart to
10 expand to a super store, which will put it in direct competition in groceries. The EIR that has
11 already been approved has statements to the effect that this community could lose one or two
12 grocery stores, which more than likely the employees of which are members of unions. These
13 union members make living wages. Already tonight, the Walmart representative talked to us
14 about$12-an-hour jobs.
15 • As a representative on the Workforce Investment Board, was in a meeting where we were talking
16 about job training that this Board is tasked with for jobs which are sustainable living wage. `We
17 were doing the math and talking $18 an hour.' That is not the kind of jobs that Walmart is
18 supporting.
19 • The Planning Commission has the ability to make a statement of overriding considerations for the
20 project and in doing so should consider the value of jobs employees of our present grocery stores
21 have and that replacing them with lower paying jobs is not what needs to be done in our
22 community.
23
24 Anne VanderHorck:
25 • Resides in Willits. Mother lives here in Ukiah. Husband works here in Ukiah. Is of the opinion we
26 are all a very large community.
27 • Thinks it is interesting to look at who is here supporting the Walmart Expansion Project. Almost
28 everybody was or is an employee. The people who are opposing the project are a cross section
29 of the community. There are people who care about the community, business owners, employees
30 of the stores that may or may not be put out of business.
31 • Is of the opinion that there is not a vested interest in such a cross section as there is in people
32 who work there.
33 • No one is asking Walmart to lose their employees, we are just asking that they not expand and
34 possibly put other people's jobs in jeopardy.
35 • Is not so worried about her husband's job because he is of an age that he can retire. It is the
36 people who are still there that is of concern.
37 • Supports having a blackboard with one column representing the `negative' aspects of the project
38 and one column for the 'positive' aspects so that at the end everyone could actually see how
39 many each column outweighs.
40
41 Danny Jacques:
42 • Supports the Walmart Expansion project and desires the Commission speedily approves the
43 Statement of Overriding Considerations.
44 • Does not work for Walmart although he has applied.
45 • Talked about prevailing wages in Ukiah and noted some businesses pay only as much as $8.50
46 an hour.
47 • Would like to have a union job although most union jobs are not full-time.
48 • It may take a while for the Expansion Project to occur and if Lucky's or Food-Maxx is still
49 struggling then there is something more to consider than just Walmart taking away their business.
50 • As far as the traffic problem, if the Talmage exist is dangerous, do not use it. A person can
51 change his/her driving habits.
52 • Would like to think that our society is intelligent. People need education not legislation. People
53 need to be aware of what the situation is and make a logical, rational decision to help one
54 another.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 28
1 • The opposition is just those persons against Walmart personally. There is not anything in this
2 room or any automobile that is made in the United Stated of America that is not connected to
3 Chinese products.
4 • The economy of the United States is in trouble and supports stepping forward and be visionaries
5 and speedily approve the Expansion Project.
6
7 Raul Ruiz:
8 • Regarding the Talmage intersection, was recently driving with a friend to attend a class at
9 Mendocino College when it became apparent the exit was already backed up. The traffic was
10 almost out to where it was pretty dangerous for anyone.
11 • Is a Walmart employee and enjoys his job.
12 • Was unemployed and is grateful Walmart gave him a job opportunity.
13 • Nitpicking at everything creates a lot of bad things and there is no gain.
14 • People shop at Walmart to get what they need. Has customers state it benefits them
15 economically to shop at Walmart.
16 • Thanked the Commission for listening to the public and all the `ranting and raving' about the
17 Walmart Expansion.
18
19 Aurba Lord:
20 • Has been a Walmart associate for eight years.
21 • Is present to support the Expansion Project.
22 • Has attended all the Planning Commission meetings so far and would like to say `we did not
23 come here to talk about our wages, our benefits, or that we are all receiving aid.'
24 • Can almost bet that most of the people here had someone in their family receive some type of
25 aid.
26 • Family taught her to have respect for the individual. Walmart does this. Has not seen much of this
27 at the Planning Commission meetings for the Walmart Expansion Project from some persons.
28 People should practice having respect for individuals.
29 • Is an American and as such, can choose where she works.
30 • Is of the opinion the issue of Walmart wages or insurance has anything to do with the Expansion
31 Project.
32 • Has worked in grocery/retail for close to 35 years. Worked at Safeway and paid union dues. Did
33 not get paid when there was a strike, but still had to pay the union dues.
34 • As a single parent there were times when she had to work more than two jobs.
35 • When in the union was not allowed to shop at other stores that were not union, not to mention
36 having a second job. At Walmart is free to shop wherever she wants.
37 • Was asked by a person at the last meeting whether or not she has benefits, if she worked full-
38 time, if part-time people had benefits and if she owned a home. Answered `yes' to these
39 questions. In fact, she owns two homes.
40 • Is not receiving aid, but did while she worked at Safeway.
41 • The point is, the project has nothing to do with where a person works. There are many reasons
42 people are on some type of aid.
43 • Does not reside in Ukiah, but spends her money here.
44 • Shops at different stores in Ukiah.
45 • Formerly worked at a Walmart super store in Reno Nevada and was able to transfer to the Ukiah
46 Walmart store. Had a job when she moved here. How many companies do that?
47 • It comes up that stores like Safeway, Lucky's, Raley's will go out of business if Walmart expands.
48 These stores are also large corporations. The supercenter where she worked in Reno had a
49 Safeway store in front of it, an Albertson's next to it and a Raley's not far from it and all of these
50 stores are still in business.
51 • Approval of the Expansion will open jobs for 85 people. These are jobs people need. Some of
52 these people might even be receiving aid.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 29
1 • Most jobs right now that a person finds are part-time. How many of those jobs have benefits? If a
2 store goes out of business because Walmart expands, it is because they were on their way out
3 anyway.
4 • The fact is Walmart is not asking to put in a whole new store. This is an existing store and has
5 been in the community for 18 years.
6 • Walmart has made a lot of contributions to this area and like myself, if it is allowed to expand, she
7 would be spending more money in this area.
8 • If Walmart does not have a certain product a customer is looking for, she will send them to other
9 stores that might carry it. There are many people that come from out of the area to shop at
10 Walmart and then shop at other stores while they are in Ukiah bringing their money into the area.
11 • There are 48 businesses besides Walmart in the center that contributes to the traffic. Food Maxx
12 and Lucky's are also owned by the same company.
13 • There are many of us that live out of the Ukiah area that carpool to work.
14 • Supports the Expansion Project and helping some less fortunate that are out of work to have a
15 chance to have a job.
16
17 April Harrington:
18 • Thanked the Planning Commission for their consideration regarding the proposed project.
19 • Does approve of Walmart because it represents progress.
20 • Likes to shop at Walmart.
21 • Supports the project provide for bike parking and an improved parking lot.
22
23 Cathy Finigan:
24 • Opposes the project. This community does not need an expanded Walmart store.
25 • Does agree with the negative comments made about this Expansion.
26 • The only thing Walmart cares about in this community is how much money it can suck out of it.
27 This is pathetic and has seen it happen.
28 • Referred to a small town in Arkansas that when she was there in 1988 was a thriving little town
29 and about 14 years later she visited the town again only to find the `square dead.' There was
30 nothing going on and then discovered a big Walmart store had been built. She talked with some
31 of the residents in the community and they were extremely sad and unhappy about what
32 happened to their town.
33 • Visited other small towns in Arkansas and found the same pattern. The heart of each town was
34 gone, but there were huge big box stores outside. This is something to consider.
35
36 Mark Poston:
37 • Has been a resident of Ukiah for 22 years.
38 • Is the current store manager of the Ukiah Lucky's supermarket.
39 • Is concerned about the Walmart Expansion.
40 • After attending previous Planning Commission meetings, the unresolved traffic issue seems to
41 present a very serious safety hazard. With neither a plan in place nor approved funding available
42 is of the opinion it would be irresponsible to the community to approve the project on this point
43 alone.
44 • Is also of the opinion our community cannot absorb another large retailer without negatively
45 affecting numerous other businesses and jobs.
46 • Has not noticed any significant growth in population in our area for some time so adding another
47 large grocery retailer does not seem to make sense. A new grocery choice in Ukiah will not attract
48 shoppers from the outside areas that do not already come to Ukiah for their grocery needs.
49 • The potential loss of the Lucky's store would also severely impact the traffic going through the
50 Pear Tree Shopping Center. This would have a negative effect on numerous other businesses in
51 the center.
52 • Is of the opinion the convenience of a super Walmart would not be a good tradeoff for the
53 community as a whole. The loss of jobs, the closures of businesses and the lower working wage
54 would not seem to be taking this community in the right direction.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 30
1 • As the manager of Lucky's, can say that he has 63 employees. Of these 63 persons, 15 have at
2 least 20 years of service. An additional 16 have at least 10 years of service. 23 of the employees
3 are full-time with a guaranteed 40 hours per week.
4 • The average wage at his store for the week ending February 4t" is $18.65 an hour.
5 • The company contributes $6.20 per hour that goes toward benefits for all of its employees. This
6 equates to an average total compensation of$24.85 per hour.
7 • His store is a 49,000 sq.ft. full-service supermarket. Lucky's is the lower volume store of the other
8 major supermarkets in town.
9 • If the Walmart Expansion Project goes through, he anticipates it to take a significant portion of
10 Lucky's business as it will with the other stores in town.
11 • Is concerned the reduction in sales will drop Lucky's below the level of keeping a facility our size
12 open.
13 • The closure of Lucky's will put 63 people out of work and while some may find employment at a
14 new super Walmart their standard of living would certainly decrease as the hourly wage and
15 benefits available to them would be significantly lower.
16 • Is of the opinion the proposed Walmart Project is not the right direction for our community.
17
18 Mike Olave:
19 • Was a former manager of Lucky's grocery store.
20 • Concern that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
21 • Is of the opinion the Expansion will not bring any more business to town and it will just take from
22 the existing retailers.
23 • Is also concerned about the local economy. If 63 persons are displaced from the Lucky's store,
24 these persons will not all get jobs. The average rate of journeyman clerk is $21.13 an hour and to
25 bring them down to $12.50 an hour, if he/she could get that much is not a good thing.
26 • The project is not good for the community.
27
28 Alan Nicholson:
29 • Provided written comments regarding the issue of traffic and traffic impacts and project benefits
30 that are herein incorporated in the minutes and referred to as attachment 6.
31 • Would like to address the Statement of Overriding Considerations:
32 Traffic
33 - Planning Director Stump mentioned there have been two letters from Jesse Robertson at
34 the Caltrans District 1 office in Eureka regarding the traffic mitigations proposed by the
35 applicant.
36 - In both of these letters, the Director of Transportation stated he highly recommended
37 deferring this project and not giving approval until plans could be approved by their office.
38 - No funding mechanisms are in place. There are no plans. Mr. Stump has indicated he is
39 working on plans.
40 - However, he spoke with Mr. Robertson last week and today, and he is concerned that
41 nobody has contacted him. He is only required by law to be involved in one scoping
42 session. Their office is very interested in finding solutions to traffic problems.
43 - It is going to be very difficult to find solutions to the traffic problems when the foundation
44 traffic-count numbers are understated, undefined. Mr. Robinson indicated if there is no
45 feasible plan and no feasible mechanism, it is going to be very difficult to come up with a
46 plan that works for the community.
47 - On this basis, it would seem very strange to approve a project based on a building
48 permit.
49 - Walmart has said they would fund their fair share if that share could be arrived at before
50 they were issued a building permit. If Walmart is issued a building permit prior to this
51 becoming a capital improvement project then Walmart would not take any responsibility
52 for it.
53 - Walmart is offering $17,000 cash up front now just to forget the whole thing and give
54 them a building permit. This does not seem very community-minded to him, and cannot
55 imagine it sounds very community-minded to anyone.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 31
1 - Caltrans has said the plan is not feasible and physically it is not feasible by funding so the
2 community is left with a horrendous traffic condition.
3 - Frequently drives by the Talmage Off-ramp because he lives in Talmage and provided a
4 picture of traffic backed up onto the freeway this morning at 7:50 a.m. Traffic is backed
5 up onto the freeway five days a week, every morning at 6:50 a.m. and the traffic is
6 frequently backed up at about 4:45 p.m. with people trying to get into the Airport Business
7 Park.
8 - The critical condition is already existing and somehow we have got to come up with a
9 solution for this problem.
10 - Is of the opinion the Statement of Overriding Considerations are not going to benefit the
11 community.
12 Conditions:
13 - On January 25�h Walmart's legal counsel submitted a letter to the Planning Commission
14 that listed 12 benefits to the City they believe outweigh the three significant and
15 unavoidable traffic impacts.
16 - We already know these traffic impacts include vehicles backed up onto the Southbound
17 101 Off-ramp as far as the freeway with a potential for serious rear-end collisions.
18 - We also know from a 2005 traffic study done by the Mendocino Council of Governments
19 (MCOG) that a new diamond interchange and freeway overcrossing could solve those
20 traffic issues.
21 - The problem from Walmart's point of view is that such a solution would be expensive and
22 time-consuming and they want to move forward no matter what the traffic consequences
23 will be. Walmart has the gall to ask the Planning Commission to side with them by way of
24 a Statement of Overriding Consideration for justifying the projecYs benefits over the
25 traffic-safety considerations.
26 - What are the so-called benefits and ramifications:
27 1. The project will add 85 new jobs, but could easily eliminate an equal or greater
28 number of jobs. Some numbers have been 150 jobs of twice the pay.
29 2. Excluding Measure S, the project may generate $10,000 in net General Fund tax
30 revenues plus some City property tax revenues unless other stores go out of
31 business and are not re-tenanted. This physical gain is a mere pittance compared to
32 the City's future obligation to upgrade nearby intersections.
33 3. Walmart will contribute $17,836 in fair-share transportation infrastructure
34 improvements, consisting largely of bike lanes and sidewalks. Walmart will only
35 contribute to necessary upgrades to the Talmage-Airport Park-Highway 101
36 intersection, shown as a roundabout provided a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is in
37 place prior to Walmart picking up its building permit. Because other traffic experts
38 consider the roundabout solution infeasible and without a CIP in place and with the
39 contribution by Walmart in doubt and/or the amount of that contribution unclear is an
40 issue to consider.
41 4. Walmart will provide a high quality design that will be pedestrian friendly. This will be
42 a generic Walmart store and the pedestrian access will virtually stop at the Walmart
43 property line.
44 5. The store will feature energy-saving features. As mentioned by the Walmart store
45 manager, several of these energy features will be installed even if the Expansion
46 Project does not move forward.
47 6. There will be attractive landscaping. The amount of total landscaping will be reduced
48 and the project needs a variance because it does not meet the City's landscape
49 requirements.
50 7. The Project will improve pedestrian access to the site. There are two main entry
51 doors, but only one pedestrian access path to the site. The relocated bus stop may
52 help Walmart, but will make it harder for bus riders to access the stores on the other
53 side of Commerce Drive.
54 8. The project will provide for improved bike circulation. This will only apply to the
55 perimeter of the site.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 32
1 9. The project will provide for better storm water treatment and detention. More of the
2 site will be paved, and as we have heard, the sediment filters may or may not be
3 changed and may be toxic. We do not know if the impacts of those, where they will
4 be deposited, how much it will cost to replace them, at what point in time, and how
5 frequently.
6 10. The project will provide 24-hour shopping convenience. These extended hours will
7 also add to crime and related police costs.
8 11. The project will stabilize the retail market. The Expansion Project will lead to store
9 closures. This is hardly stability.
10 12. Walmart will be a good member of the community. Any additional contributions from
11 Walmart could come at the expense of other retailers.
12
13 • The question before the Planning Commission is whether these benefits outweigh the EIR as it
14 describes potential safety hazards, increasing the degree to which an existing queuing back-up
15 would exceed the available storage length.
16 • The EIR is correct that these queuing hazards could lead to serious or fatal injury, even death.
17 The benefits described by Walmart are not justified.
18 • Please do not let Walmart off the hook for fixing their traffic problems.
19 • Please deny the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
20
21 Steve Scalamini:
22 • Is equally concerned about the fundamental safety risks that we face versus what seems like a
23 pittance of financial benefit to the City, let alone the other benefits.
24 • The mitigations that are presented to us and we have heard testimony at previous meetings and
25 tonight that these cannot be shown. In fact, Caltrans does not believe them to be mitigations.
26 What has been said clearly is that there is not enough information given to show they will, in fact,
27 be mitigations.
28 • Is not sure if it has been mentioned very much although Alan Nicholson touched on it, but the
29 MCOG report completed in 2005 entitled `The Route 101 Corridor Interchange Study' shows a
30 couple of mitigation ideas which look like full mitigations. The document talks about providing for
31 a wider overpass and multiple lanes in each direction, which MCOG thinks would be a
32 reasonable and/or full mitigation/true solution. Somehow, those options were omitted or ignored
33 in the EIR because they were not mentioned.
34 • It is his understanding the fact these options exist is one of the many reasons that can be used to
35 turn down the project, seeing that the mitigations that have been presented do not have proven
36 validity.
37 • Regarding the 85 jobs Walmart claims they are going to add include no information to actually
38 substantiate that there will not be roughly 85 jobs lost elsewhere. And, in fact, in the record of
39 studies that have been done over the years, there is nothing to substantiate there will be 85 net
40 new jobs.
41 • Furthermore, there is literature that says the benefits of the employment and such are roughly a
42 wash. There may be a few more, there may be a few less. It is not clear. The worst case
43 scenario that has been quoted and done in the past was a study that shows the ratio of jobs lost
44 is three to two or 1.4 jobs lost for every one job gained. That is the worst case. To counter this,
45 one of the items sent in by the economic consultant for the applicant cited some literature, but
46 none of that literature says anything `significant to the other direction.' The best it shows is that it
47 is going to be a wash, i.e., a few more or a few less jobs. Is of the opinion that is not going to be
48 85 needed new jobs. There is going to be roughly zero net new jobs, but if the 85 jobs move from
49 living wage-paying over to WalmarYs scale, then the difference in scale is going to be in the
50 ballpark of$10 an hour. Multiply this by 40 hours a week, 52 hours a year and 85 employees the
51 amount is $1.7 million. So part of the Commission's decision is whether you want $1.7 million to
52 escape the local economy and no longer circulate through with sales tax paid.
53 • With regard to the discussion about full-time employment, it is his understanding that full-time is
54 not a 40-hour week, but rather 32 hours per week. Does not know if this is the case in Ukiah, but
55 would like to know.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 33
1 • Is concerned as previous speakers indicated about the price that Walmart will pay for mitigations.
2 The current mitigations, being roundabouts are in the ballpark of a few million dollars. Heard
3 today that the roundabout put in for Fort Bragg just a few months ago cost $4.4 million. Perhaps
4 we could get some kind of a confirmation at some point from staff in this regard.
5 • Regarding the $17,000 figure as Walmart's proportional fair share for traffic improvement costs,
6 there is some further work that needs to be done to consider what the benefits for the project are
7 going to be and how that is going to be paid for.
8 • In terms of MCOG's report and the cost for what is recommended by them is probably in the
9 ballpark of 10 times that and/or perhaps in the 30 to 40 million dollar range.
10 • Assumes there will be some costs coming from staff about traffic improvements.
11 • Heard mention of `pedestrian friendly' as one of the alleged benefits. It is his understanding the
12 pedestrian access through the site is not settled. There are two doors to the site and pedestrian
13 access is only to one of them
14 • More importantly, has not seen 'pedestrian' mentioned in any discussion regarding the
15 roundabout. So how does somebody in a wheelchair get through the roundabout? There is no
16 stop sign. If that is the mitigation, he is confused.
17 • Walmart's own traffic consultant refutes and referred to the roundabout sketches as cartoons.
18 Does not want to overplay that particular term but those sketches do not say anything about
19 pedestrians. At least today there are stop signs, but with a roundabout there will not be.
20 • Is unable to report on ADA compatibility but is having someone look at this issue.
21 • There is mention of 24-hour shopping convenience. Only a few hundred feet away from the
22 current location of Walmart is a 24-hour grocery store. Does not see any particular need for
23 Walmart to sell groceries too.
24 • One of the alleged project benefits is the stabilization of the retail market. It does not figure that
25 other store closures represent stabilization.
26 • Regarding being a good member of the community, is still waiting to hear a commitment from
27 Walmart that they are going to use their medical office there to treat their own employees.
28 Brought this subject up in the scoping session. Is of the belief that If Walmart had a medical
29 office in their building, they use it for their employees.
30 • Another concern that relates to the topic of being a good member of the community is the
31 additional police services that are going to be required. This is documented in the financial
32 and/or economic benefits to the City analysis that was done.
33 • The EIR states clearly the additional police services that will be required at Walmart as a result of
34 the Expansion Project means less police available for the rest of the City. So where is the benefit
35 if the police services are going to be at Walmart and not available for the rest of the City?
36 • The draft document that has been created says the benefits somehow outweigh the concerns of
37 safety and traffic spilling onto the freeway and such just baffles him. Cannot see how the benefits
38 possibly outweigh the safety risks and the risks to life and limb in collisions from traffic backing
39 up onto the freeway.
40 • Has heard a few times tonight how the traffic already backs up to the freeway. What is the point?
41 If the traffic is already bad, why approve a project and make it worse?
42
43 Chair Pruden:
44 • The Commission has had four hearings, approximately 30 hours of hearings. When the public
45 hearing is closed for this meeting, this will be the end of the public hearing process for the Site
46 Development and for the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
47 • Polled the Commission to make certain they have sufficient information to be able to go to
48 deliberations the next time they meet.
49
50 There was discussion reading the next meeting date for the Walmart Expansion Project and determined
51 the meeting will likely be March 14.
52
53 Commissioner Sanders: Would like to see the draft minutes for the last three or four hearing that were
54 held.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 34
1 There was Commission discussion whether or not they have sufficient information to deliberate on the
2 Expansion Project.
3
4 City Attorney Rapport: The Commission's job is to base your decision on all of the evidence that has
5 been part of the record for all those meetings that you have already had. All the Findings regarding the
6 Statement of Overriding Considerations have to be based on substantial evidence in the record. So, if you
7 do not know what will happen at the next Walmart project hearing, you will have to make a decision and
8 then ask staff to come back with findings to support whichever decision that turns out to be. It may be the
9 meeting may carry over to the next meeting after that. The Commission may want to give some
10 instruction tonight to start the process of reviewing the record to see what evidence supports whatever
11 findings the Commission wants to make.
12
13 Chair Pruden:
14 • Acknowledged the late hour.
15 • Directed dialogue to Planning Director Stump and stated the Commission essentially has two
16 directions it can go. The Commission can make a voting decision on March 14 and then instruct
17 staff to bring back findings that support or the Commission can basically instruct staff to come up
18 with findings representing our point of view.
19 • Is of the opinion this is something staff needs to discuss among themselves and then bring that
20 conversation forward to the Planning Commission.
21
22 City Attorney Rapport:
23 • Agreed this is a practical approach because the Commission has to deliberate in an open
24 session.
25 • Would like to start reviewing the record just to see what evidence there is before March 14.
26
27 Commissioner Sanders: Expressed concern about comments from Caltrans and the lack of contact
28 with Jesse Robertson from staff except for the very recent contact.
29
30 Planning Director Stump:
31 • It is his understanding Public Works staff has not had an ongoing dialogue with Caltrans.
32 • Caltrans did comment on the EIR and after the EIR was certified. Caltrans submitted the January
33 25th letter after the January 18 City Council certification. It was at that point the City contacted
34 them.
35 • Another reason City staff contacted them was because we have made some progress on looking
36 at more detailed design work and with getting some engineered cost estimates. We are not there
37 yet, but we wanted to report that to CalTrans in response to Caltrans' January 25th letter, in which
38 they were basically saying they did not have enough detail to be convinced anything would work
39 there.
40 • The conversation is now opening up and we are getting more information.
41 • Is hopeful in the next month or so there will be a lot more information for Caltrans, for the public,
42 and for the Commission.
43
44 Commissioner Sanders: Would really like to hear about the roundabout, if that is really a viable option.
45
46 Planning Director Stump: This is part of the information we are trying to determine. There are two
47 different roundabout possibilities and there is the signalized loop. All of these things are being looked at.
48
49 Commissioner Sanders: Inquired about the pedestrian issue and `how are semi's going to be
50 accommodated?'
51
52 Planning Director Stump: That is a big part of the engineering. Consideration for the trucks that have to
53 come into the Redwood Business Park is a standard part of the modeling that is being done.
54
55 Commissioner poble:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 35
1 • Asked about procedure and in the next hearing will the Commission be talking more about the
2 Site Development Permit and getting thoughts on that or are is the Commission going straight
3 into the Statement of Overriding Considerations? There were some changes made to the project
4 that the Commission should talk about.
5 • Asked if the application for the solar permit being processed as a ministerial permit is under
6 Commission purview? Is still unclear as to whether it is going to be part of the project package.
7
8 Planning Director Stump:
9 • Staff just received the building permit. We are looking at it to determine whether or not it breaks
10 the threshold for a site development permit. If it does, it will come before the Planning
11 Commission and packaged accordingly such that it would be meaningful for the Commission to
12 understand that it is part of the project.
13 • Part of the review Planning staff does when a building permit comes in is to determine whether or
14 not it complies with the zoning and whether or not a discretionary permit is required. We are in
15 the process of doing this.
16
17 Commissioner poble: Requested clarification if there is an ongoing discretionary permit and an
18 application is made for a ministerial permit, i.e., building permit it would come under that discretionary
19 permit application. It appears this building permit application is being treated as if it is ministerial and not
20 discretionary because if it was discretionary, it would be within this package.
21
22 City Attorney Rapport:
23 • Is of the opinion, if Walmart can do the solar panel project with just a building permit, they do not
24 need a site development permit and should be able to do this.
25 • It would not automatically become part of the pending site development permit application unless
26 they were going to make that part of the design for the expanded project.
27
28 Chair Pruden: The way it has been explained is that the building permit submittal is for the existing
29 building and is not related to the Expansion Project.
30
31 City Attorney Rapport: If the applicant is planning on putting the solar panels on the expanded portion
32 of the project this would depend on what the site development permit encompasses and could be a part
33 of the site development permit.
34
35 Commissioner poble: We talked about architecture quite a bit at the last meeting. There are some
36 changes to the fa�ade that were requested and they were provided to us, but as far as the solar array, we
37 do not know if it is flat, visible, a sawtooth pattern and such. This is a question that requires clarification.
38
39 Chair Pruden: The applicants listening to this discussion may want to further refine their thought process
40 so there may be some additional input to us.
41
42 Commissioner Whetzel: Would still like to see the original site plan with the 20 percent landscaping in
43 order to see what the footprint of the building would be like.
44
45 Chair Pruden:
46 • We will see if the applicant will provide this information.
47 • For the audience, the public hearing is closed.
48 • We will address the Walmart issue on March 14`n
49 • There will be Planning Commission deliberations about two items, the Site Development Permit
50 and the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
51 • We are not entirely sure whether we will go to a vote or not. If we go to vote, we will then have to
52 instruct staff to come up with findings to support that vote, depending on how it goes.
53 • The Commission requests that the Walmart Expansion Project be the only item on the March 14tn
54 agenda.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 36
1 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 10:47 p.m.
2
3 It was the consensus of the Commission that Walmart Expansion Project Site Development Permit and
4 Statement of Overriding Conditions be continued to the March 14t" regular Planning Commission meeting.
5
6 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
7 Planning Director Stump reported there will likely be a preliminary review application for the February
8 22"a Planning Commission meeting.
9
10 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
11 Commissioner Sanders advised TAG is ready to present the tree list to Council and this should occur at
12 the regular March 7th City Council meeting.
13
14 12. ADJOURNMENT
15 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:13 p.m.
16
17
18 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
19
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8, 2012
Page 37