HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_08082012 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 August 8, 2012
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair Kevin Doble
7 Linda Sanders Jason Brenner
8 Mike Whetzel
9
10 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
11 Charley Stump, Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
12 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
13 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15
16 1. CALL TO ORDER
17 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by
18 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
19 Ukiah, California.
20
21 2. ROLL CALL
22
23 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
24
25 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —The minutes from the July 25, 2012 will be available for review and
26 approval at the August 22, 2012 meeting.
27
28 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
29
30 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting
31 the last date to file for an appeal is August 20, 2012.
32
33 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
34
35 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by staff.
36
37 9. PUBLIC HEARING
38 9A. Downtown Zoning Code (DZC) Mitigated Negative Declaration and Zoning Ordinance
39 Amendment. Planning Commission consideration and possible recommendation to City Council
40 to: 1) adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Downtown Zoning Code: and 2) introduce
41 and adopt an Ordinance to amend Ukiah City Code Division 9 (Planning and Development),
42 Chapter 2 (Zoning)to include the Downtown Zoning Code as Article 18.
43
44 Senior Planner Jordan gave a staff report.
45 • Staff is requesting the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing with possible
46 recommendations to the City Council to 1) adopt a Resolution to adopt the Mitigated Negative
47 Declaration for the DZC and 2) introduce and adopt an Ordinance to Amend the Zoning
48 Ordinance to include the DZC.
49 • Referred to pages 3-5 of the staff report, Table 1, Changes to the Downtown Zoning Code, that
50 shows the substantive changes made to Planning Commission's draft of the DZC by City Council,
51 as well as the reasoning for the changes and/or other revisions made and the entity making the
52 change.
53 • Focus for tonight's Commission meeting is more on the environmental document since this is the
54 first time the Commission has reviewed this document.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 1
1 Commission comments: Likes the way the changes were laid out in Table 1 and the corresponding
2 rationale.
3
4 Commissioner Sanders: Referred to page 26, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Biological Resources,
5 pertinent to setbacks for Gibson Creek, and asked if the North Coast Regional Water Control Board had
6 submitted comments.
7
8 Staff: No comments from this agency were submitted regarding the Negative Declaration for the DZC.
9
10 Commissioner Sanders:
11 • Would like the record to reflect the comments from the North Coast Regional Water Control
12 Board regarding the new Courthouse project.
13 • Is not proposing the 50-foot setback recommendation be changed even though it is relevant to
14 the environmental document.
15 • Referred to Comments and responses to Environmental Issues from the Mona Dougherty, P.E.,
16 Senior Water Resource Control Engineer, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
17 (NCRWQCB) relative to the Courthouse project, new Ukiah Courthouse Final EIR and cited in
18 part some of sub-paragraph 8.3 that states, `The NCRWQCB recommends a 100-foot buffer zone
19 between the proposed project and surface water, as well as a minimum setback of 100 feet from
20 the top of bank of a stream, watercourse or the edge of a wetland, and the proposed project.'
21 Provided the Commission with copies of the statements made in response to the Ukiah
22 Courthouse Final EIR. Asked if staff had any comments about the aforementioned reference.
23
24 Staff: Is aware of the comment letter from the NCRWQCB regarding the Courthouse project final EIR. If
25 a specific project comes in that concerns the DZC, the City may get a similar comment from the
26 NCRWQCB. However, the Board does not comment on the actual DZC document.
27
28 Commissioner Sanders: Brought up the topic of green building and commented she did not see in the
29 DZC text about recycle/re-use and repurpose of building materials. This subject is likely related to the
30 section on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions of the document and requests this information
31 be included in the DZC.
32
33 Staff:
34 • Acknowledged the aforementioned topic is not included in the DZC because the topic did not
35 come up from any of the Commissioners, Councilmembers and/or any members of the public.
36 The new California Green Code has requirements related to recycling/salvage/re-use, plans for
37 new commercial/residential construction, and remodels and additions. From staff's perspective,
38 this would be covered under the building code requirements. In addition, staff will be beginning
39 the Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Climate Action Plan shortly and the implementation measure
40 for the Climate Action Plan often includes such topics.
41 • Staff would prefer not to add requirements related to recycling/salvage/re-use in the DZC in order
42 to steer away from possible conflicting information with the requirements in other documents that
43 more appropriately address this subject.
44
45 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:12 p.m.
46
47 Steve Scalmanini: Asked if there was any new information or any comment received from Downtown
48 businesses since the last review and/or any new information from the Downtown businesses that would
49 be in competition related to the Exemptions allowed for bakeries/hot dog stands/coffee shops concerning
50 the definition of restaurant - formula fast food listed in Table 3: Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements
51 and Glossary of the DZC.
52
53 Staff: No new public comments have been received since the City Council workshops regarding the
54 DZC.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 2
1 Chair Pruden: Works with the Ukiah Main Street Program and sits on two of the sub-committees. To her
2 knowledge no businesses have contacted the Ukiah Main Street Program in the last six months. When
3 Council was reviewing the DZC and Exemptions to the use table and definition and exemptions to
4 restaurant formula fast food last year, there was discussion and clarification on Ukiah Main Street
5 Program issues. These discussions appear to have satisfied questions/concerns about the Exemptions to
6 the formula fast food definitions. Typically the Ukiah Main Street Director would advise her if there is a
7 problem.
8
9 Commissioner Sanders: Recalled a survey conducted last year regarding Table 3 of the DZC and the
10 exemptions to the formula fast food definition in which 82% of Main Street members polled were in favor
11 of allowing bakeries, coffee shops, etc.
12
13 Chair Pruden:
14 • Referred to Section 13 of the DZC, Glossary, that defines the following:
15
16 Restaurant, Cafe, Coffee Shop —A retail business selling ready-to-eat food and/or beverages for
17 on or off-premise consumption. These include eating establishments where customers are served
18 from an ordering counter for either on or off-premise consumption ("counter service");
19 establishments where customers are served food at their tables for on-premise consumption
20 ("table service"), which may also provide food for takeout; and exclusively pedestrian oriented
21 facilities that serve from a walk-up ordering counter. May include outdoor dining with the permit
22 requirements included in Table 3: Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements. Does not include
23 "Mobile Food Vendor" or"Mobile Food Vendor—Stationary which are separately defined.
24
25 Restaurant—Formula Fast Food —a restaurant that includes all of the following characteristics:
26 A. Is required by contractual or other arrangements to maintain any of the following:
27 substantially standardized menus, architecture, building appearance, signs, or other similar
28 standardized features;
29 B. Has three or more of the following characteristics:
30 1. Food is pre-made and wrapped before customers place orders;
31 2. Food is served with disposable tableware for on-site consumption;
32 3. Food is ordered from a wall menu at a service counter.
33 4. Food consumed on the premises is ordered while customers are standing;
34 5. Payment is made by customers before food is consumed; or
35 6. The service counter is closer to an entry/exit than is the seating/dining area.
36
37 Ice cream shops, coffeehouses, bakeries, hot dog stands, or other businesses whose primary
38 function is not the sale of full meals are exempt from this definition.
39
40 • The Final DZC draft dated August 1, 2012 reflects Council's final determination on the definition
41 of restaurant, cafe, coffeehouse and restaurant — formula fast food which appears to match the
42 desires of the public.
43
44 Commissioner Sanders:
45 • 82.5% of the people surveyed by Ukiah Main Street Program supported the Exemptions made for
46 ice cream parlors, coffeehouses, and hot dog stands in the DZC related to formula fast food
47 restaurants.
48 • Does not know of any follow-up survey conducted for Main Street businesses in the DZC.
49
50 Steve Scalmanini: Asked what is the consensus for the other 18°/a? of the businesses that are going to
51 be competing with the Exemptions?
52
53 Chair Pruden: Is of the opinion that discussion never occurred only that Main Street did write a letter to
54 Council indicating what their preference was concerning formula fast food restaurants. There was
55 discussion that establishments such as Quiznos, Subways, Pizza Hut and the like could not be in the
56 Downtown core. Businesses in the Downtown were looking at franchise food and making assumptions
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 3
1 and once they were assured that the definitions for formula fast food restaurants were different than
2 interpreted there was no issue. They realized franchise food establishments were not the same `across
3 the board.'
4
5 Steve Scalmanini: Asked about the former Wendy's fast food drive thru restaurant that burned down
6 and what can occur there.
7
8 Chair Pruden: If the DZC is adopted, no new drive-thru restaurants can occur in the DZC boundaries
9 and cannot be grandfathered in.
10
11 Commissioner Sanders: Referred to Section 4 of the DZC, Table 3, page 14, related to formula fast
12 food restaurants for General Urban (GU), Urban Center (UC) and Downtown Core (DC) zoning
13 designations and asked staff to explain how City Code section 5.090 would work as noted for in the
14 'Additional Zoning Requirements by Code Section' column.
15
16 Staff: The intent is to make it clear that restaurant - formula fast food itself is not allowed in any of the
17 zoning designations, so any use that meets the definition of restaurant - formula fast food is prohibited.
18 With regard to code section 5.090 of the DZC this section talks about the Exemptions to the definitions of
19 which would be allowed subject to the specific requirements in section 5.090. These were the
20 requirements that Council wanted to apply to the exemptions.
21
22 Chair Pruden: The DZC Glossary `really defines the process.' The definition of restaurant —fast food is
23 not a simple a definition, but rather is an expanded definition with the exemptions.
24
25 Commissioner Sanders: How does the applicant go through the process to get the Exemption?
26
27 Staff: Page 25 of the DZC, section 5.090 for restaurant — formula fast food, states `A formula fast food
28 restaurant shall comply with the requirements of Section 5.090 when allowed by Table 3: Allowed Uses
29 and Permit Requirements.' Subsections A — D of Section 5.090 define the requirements for this code
30 section.
31
32 A determination must be made whether the applicant qualifies for an exemption and then follow the steps
33 provided for in code section 5.090. The proposed project has to be consistent with the exemption and
34 within the boundaries of the Code. Subsection D, Requirement for Formula Fast Food Restaurant —
35 Exemptions, Number, states, 'As of the date of the adoption of the Code, not more than four additional
36 businesses consistent with the exemptions allowed to "Restaurant — Formula Fast Food" in Section 13:
37 Glossary shall be allowed within the boundaries of this Code' so once the code is adopted and effective,
38 this would be the baseline. Starting from this four additional businesses are possible provided they meet
39 the definition of an exemption and comply with the requirements for number of establishments, storefront
40 size, and obtain a site development permit. Under site development permit the code section looks at other
41 considerations to include design, sign design, sign lighting, window signs, modifications and trash
42 disposal plan.
43
44 Staff would first proceed with determining whether the project meets the definition of the exemption. If it
45 does, it is treated as a `restauranY in terms of where it is allowed by Table 3: Uses and Permit
46 Requirements. Restaurants are allowed in all three zoning districts.
47
48 Chair Pruden: Referred to item 9A of the staff report, Table 1, Section 5, Standards for Specific Land
49 Uses and DZC code sections 5.060 (staff created standards for `live entertainment when allowed by
50 Table 3), 5.070 (City Council created standards for outdoor dining when allowed by Table 3,and 5.080
51 (City Council created standards for `sidewalk cafes when allowed by Table 3) and asked if the final
52 outcome by Council is that these establishments would not require a use permit.
53
54 Staff: If someone wants to have outdoor dining or sidewalk cafe project, if the Project complies with the
55 requirements, no use permit is required. If the project wants to deviate from certain standards, the
56 applicant may apply for Zoning Administrator approval of a Minor Use Permit. This same process would
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 4
1 follow for live entertainment. If a project is non-amplified live entertainment that meets specific
2 requirements including hours of operation and number of performers, a use permit is not required.
3 However, it an applicant wants to do deviate from these standards in section 5.060, it may be possible
4 with approval of a Minor Use Permit.
5
6 Commissioner Sanders: Does the noise ordinance have to be complied with?
7
8 Staff: All businesses or persons are always subject to compliance with all City codes, including the Noise
9 Ordinance.
10
11 Katherine Elliott:
12 • She and her husband own a building in the Downtown.
13 • Supports the process for projects is made easier so as to encourage more businesses to
14 occur/develop and thrive in Ukiah.
15 • Would like to see the process for having music be made easier.
16
17 Chair Pruden:
18 • The best way to simplify a process is to `spell it all out' so people understand upfront what they
19 are getting into. The DZC with its special detailed coding provides for this kind of process so one
20 understands exactly what the parameters of a particular project are in terms of making the project
21 work whereas projects in the past have been subject to interpretation.
22
23 George Lucas:
24 • Plays the flute and sometimes likes to play live.
25 • His music is amplified.
26
27 Staff:
28 • Technically, live entertainment has always required a use permit.
29 • Is not familiar with a flute being an amplified instrument.
30 • Under the current rules a use permit is necessary for live entertainment.
31
32 Chair Pruden: Referred to DZC, page 26, Section 5.100, Condominiums, and asked how this section
33 works with the requirements of UCC Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 12: Condominium Development.
34
35 Staff: Section 5.100 replaces UCC Division 9 for condominium development within the boundaries of the
36 DZC.
37
38 Chair Pruden: Advised staff of typographical errors and/or other informational errors in the Initial
39 Environmental Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration document for correction purposes.
40
41 Commissioner Sanders:
42 • Referred to DZC, page 51, subsection G, Reduction of Water Pollution and Stormwater Run Off,
43 and is of the opinion this section is new. Is pleased to see this section as part of the DZC.
44 • Referred to Environment Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, page 30, Cultural Resources,
45 subsection 5, `If, during site grubbing, grading, soil excavation or any aspect of future project
46 development project, any pre-historic, historic, or significant cultural resources are discovered, all
47 work shall be halted and the contract/project proponent shall immediately contact the City of
48 Ukiah Director of Planning and Community Development. The City shall engage the services of a
49 qualified professional archaeologist at the expense of the project proponents, to perform a site
50 reconnaissance and to develop a precise mitigation program, if necessary,' and asked with
51 regard to significant cultural resources if`significanY should be more clearly defined.
52
53 Chair Pruden: Noted `significant' in this regard is actually defined in other documents, including the
54 City's Demolition Ordinance.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 5
1 Staff: `Significance' is defined under CEQA so there is no need to further define it.
2
3 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:39 p.m.
4
5 M/S Sanders/Chair Pruden to recommend Ukiah City Council 1) adopt a Resolution to adopt the
6 Mitigated Negative for the Downtown Zoning Code and 2) introduce an Ordinance to amend to Division 9
7 (Planning and Development), Chapter 2 (Zoning) of the Ukiah City code to include Article 18 (Downtown
8 Zoning Code included as attachments 1 and 2 of the staff report. Motion carried (2-1)with Commissioner
9 Whetzel voting `No' and Commissioners Doble and Brenner absent.
10
11 Commissioner Whetzel supports recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, but did
12 not vote in favor of the Ordinance because he is of the opinion that no business should be prohibited in
13 given the current economic climate.
14
15 9B. McDonalds Restaurant Building and Drive-Thru Reconstruction and Outdoor Dining, File
16 No.: 12-07-SDP-UP-PC. Planning Commission consideration and possible action on a request for
17 approval of a Major Site Development Permit to allow the construction of a new McDonalds
18 Restaurant Building and Drive-Thru and Use Permit for Outdoor Dining at 115 North Orchard
19 Avenue, APN 002-200-40. The application also includes a request for approval of: 1)
20 modifications to the landscaping requirements; and 2) an exception to the number of parking
21 spaces required.
22
23 Associate Planner Faso presented the staff report.
24
25 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:05 p.m.
26
27 Efrain Corona, project construction manager gave a project presentation:
28 • Thanked Planning staff for assisting the applicant with getting through the use permit and site
29 development permit discretionary review process.
30 • Is of the opinion the project, as presented, represents consideration of all the potential project
31 impacts and building design and site improvement recommendations made where the end result
32 provides for a project that is a good fit for the community.
33 • While the restaurant and corresponding drive-thru are operational the restaurant building is
34 outdated in terms of aesthetics and the equipment and general site layout no longer allows for a
35 well-run/efficient operation due to the need to incorporate new technology and make site
36 improvements.
37 • Referred to the site plans and talked about the current building and site layout and the proposed
38 new building and site layout plans as they relate to the grading, planting/landscaping and
39 irrigation plans, building floor plan, proposed elevations, signage, and other relevant
40 plans/information that concern traffic/circulation, parking, ingress and egress, pedestrian access
41 and landscaping and how the drive-thru component would work.
42 • Worked closely with staff to formulate a landscaping plan regarding on-site plantings, street trees
43 and parking lot trees that would complement/enhance the site.
44 • The site is fully ADA accessible.
45 • An attractive barrier is proposed by public works along the E. Perkins Street property line for
46 safety purposes to encourage people to use the crosswalk to access McDonalds from across the
47 street.
48 • Is of the opinion with regard to the building's exterior, the design, and color
49 palates/materials/textures that the project is architecturally pleasing.
50 • With regard to the building's interior, the kitchen, seating areas and such have been modernized
51 and replaced in order to provide sufficient space and maximize efficiency.
52 • The plans seen tonight are the result of the project preliminary review.
53 • McDonalds is committed to incorporating/utilizing as many`Green' components as is possible and
54 incorporates such practices for sustainable growth.
55 • This particular site will feature vegetative swales for the purpose of capturing storm water on-site.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 6
1 • Lighting will be energy efficient and the interior lighting will be 100% LED. The concept of day-
2 lighting will be used where feasible.
3 • All kitchen equipment will be `energy star' rated to provide for energy savings/conservation.
4 • Is of the opinion the project works well with the diversity of the community members.
5 • Is available to answer Commission questions.
6
7 Chair Pruden:
8 Q1. Who will be responsible for the maintenance outside of the fence line that is McDonalds property?
9 This particular area has always been an eyesore.
10 Q2. For shade purposes, will umbrellas and/or some type of sun shade be used for the outdoor
11 seating area because the western sun in the afternoon is brutal?
12 Q3. Referred to the materials and color renderings and asked if the ledger stone is of a lighter tone
13 than what was shown during preliminary review of the project.
14 Q4. How will the dark brown color of the building be integrated into the stucco because brown paint
15 does not hold up well in Ukiah's hot summer climate because it absorbs too much heat?
16 Q5. Inquired about attachment 9-9 and what the material will be used for.
17
18 Efrain Corona:
19 A1. Landscaping is proposed for this area and will be maintained by McDonalds.
20 A2. A shade structure of some type and/or umbrella will be included over the tables in the outdoor
21 dining area.
22 A3. Confirmed the stone as shown will be a lighter color than what was originally proposed.
23 A4. Explained the process and noted the technique involves a three-coat stucco system with an
24 integration of the color having an acrylic finish.
25 A5. The colored smooth stained concrete will be used for the outdoor seats. All of the outdoor seating
26 is reinforced concrete.
27
28 Commissioner Sanders:
29 • The drive-thru and the pathway that comes from Orchard Avenue appear to be textured. Is there
30 a need for a stop sign at this location to possibly address problems with the intermingling of
31 vehicles and pedestrians?
32 • While pleased with the amenities and changes made to the project supports the building be
33 located more southerly towards Perkins Street but understands all the different site constraints
34 prevents this from occurring.
35 • Is appreciative that the applicant and staff worked together to create an aesthetically pleasing
36 project.
37 • Is pleased with the selection of Valley Oak trees for the project. With regard to the landscaping
38 would like to see the use of permeable weed cloth and a three-foot perimeter around the trunks of
39 the Oak Trees that is vegetation free as a condition of approval.
40
41 Mike Whetzel: Is the reason for the request for reduced parking the result of the changes the
42 Commission made during preliminary review?
43
44 Efrain Corona:
45 • The drive-thrus for all McDonalds nationwide do not have a pedestrian entry so a stop sign is not
46 necessary.
47 • The original plan also had reduced parking.
48
49 Staff: While the McDonalds project is not close to what is required for parking, is of the opinion parking is
50 not an issue. There is nothing the Planning Commission requested as part of the preliminary review that
51 suggested McDonalds should have more parking. The outdoor seating requested by the Commission as
52 part of the preliminary review does require parking; however, staff does not believe that additional parking
53 is needed for the outdoor seating.
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 7
1 Bob Mendez, Licensee/Owner of McDonald's Restaurant: Is available to answer Commission
2 questions.
3
4 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:39 p.m.
5
6 The Commission discussed staff's analysis as follows:
7
8 Table 1: General Plan Goals and Policies
9
10 Commission consensus:
11 • No questions/comments with Table 1 and accepts staff's analysis.
12
13 Table 2: Summary of B-2 In-fill Policv and Compatibilitv Criteria
14
15 Commission comments:
16 • Agrees with staff analysis.
17
18 Commission consensus:
19 • No questions/concerns with Table 2 and accepts staff's analysis.
20
21 Table 3: Zoninq Ordinance and Site Analysis
22
23 Commission:
24 • Has observed over the years that the McDonalds parking lot is never filled to capacity.
25 • The majority of the traffic appears to be affiliated with the drive-thru.
26 • There is a fair amount of foot traffic due to the proximity of the Wagonseller Neighborhood.
27 • Discussed the parking for the site and how it would work with the landscaping strips and
28 associated curbing and drainage.
29 • How will the `drainage slot' work on the south side of the curbed area?
30 • Asked about what will happen to the 'M' shrub currently displayed on the site.
31
32 Efrain Corona:
33 • Confirmed a 6-inch curb will be used for the parking perimeters. Most of the storm water will be
34 captured in the drive-thru lane and corresponding interim swale. He located the proposed swale
35 on the site plans.
36 • Demonstrated that the storm water will essentially flow northerly to the swale.
37 • It will be eliminated unless a space is found to relocate it.
38
39 Commission:
40 • Further discussed with staff the applicanYs request for modification to zoning ordinance section
41 9087 concerning the issue of the planting strip where McDonalds says due to the lot size and lot
42 configuration the requirement is not possible and would require McDonalds to remove 4
43 additional parking spaces which would further complicate the parking requirement. McDonald's
44 notes as an alternative that while the trees between stalls cannot be met due to site constraints,
45 will provide a total of 40 trees onsite and a considerable amount of landscaping that is
46 approximately 31% lot coverage and with the proposed design, McDonalds will exceed the 50°/a
47 lot shade requirement with a percentage of 55%.
48 • Likes the landscaping in that the Project will provide 40 trees and more than 10,000 sq. ft. of
49 landscaping and will also provide 50% shade coverage of paved areas within 15 years.
50
51 Staff: Table 3, subsection 5, The zoning ordinance states, `Parking lots with 12 or more parking stalls
52 shall have a tree placed between every four parking stalls within a continuous linear planting strip, rather
53 than individual planting wells, unless clearly unfeasible.' The Project does not comply with the
54 requirement and the applicant has requested approval of a modification/exception from the requirement
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 8
1 as provided for in attachment 6-1. In order to provide the required number of planter islands, the number
2 of parking spaces would need to be reduced.
3
4 Commission:
5 • Likes the concept of the tree wells because they provide screening to the front of the restaurant.
6 • Trees in tree wells must be appropriately watered and cared for, but with the right species they
7 should do fine.
8
9 Chair Pruden: While the proposed fence is aesthetically pleasing is of the opinion it is not necessary.
10
11 Staff: The Public Works Department considers the fence a safety concern so if the applicant did not
12 include it as part of the project plans, it would have been a project condition of approval. The reason this
13 is not seen anywhere else on Perkins Street is because on the opposite side of the Perkins Street, a
14 sidewalk exists that connects to the sidewalk for the overpass. As a safety measure, the Public Works
15 Department does not want pedestrians to cross the street to the McDoanlds side thinking that there is a
16 sidewalk that connects over the over pass. The intent in the future is that if a sidewalk is constructed as
17 part of the over pass on the McDonalds side, the easement would allow Public Works to construct a
18 sidewalk on the south end of the property to connect to the sidewalk over the overpass.
19
20 Commission consensus:
21 • Parking for the Site Development Permit: agrees with staff's analysis on page 6 of the staff report
22 supporting the applicanYs request for an exception to the number of onsite parking spaces
23 required.
24 • Landscaping for the Site Development Permit — 1) agrees with staff's analysis on pages 7 and 8
25 of the staff report supporting applicant's request for modification to the 50°/o shade coverage
26 requirement, granting of the modification to the landscaping requirement to provide a pedestrian
27 pathway through parking lots with more than 12 parking spaces, and to provide a landscape
28 planter island with trees between every four parking spaces acceptable.
29 • No other comments/recommendations/changes were made to Table 3.
30
31 Sign Ordinance
32
33 Commission:
34 • Likes that the site is under signed.
35 • Commission understands that properties like McDonalds that exist coming off of a freeway have
36 an additional height advantage and are allowed to put up a higher sign by code.
37
38 Staff: The existing highway sign is not changing.
39
40 Commission consensus:
41 • Agrees with staff's analysis.
42 • No changes/recommendations were made.
43
44 Table 4: Desiqn Guidelines for Proiects Inside the Downtown Desiqn District Consistencv Analvsis
45
46 Commission consensus:
47 • No changes/recommendations were made.
48
49 Table 5: Summarv of Proiect Consistencv with Site Development Permit Findinqs
50
51 Commission consensus:
52 • No changes/recommendations were made.
53
54 Table 6: Use Permit Analvsis for Outdoor Dininq
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 9
1 Commission:
2 • Sees that a trash proposal plan is required and this is appreciated.
3 • Do some of McDonalds employees get to work using public transportation because a bus stop
4 exists nearby?
5 • A ride sharing plan is likely not necessary because McDonalds operates a much smaller business
6 compared to Walmart.
7
8 Bob Mendez:
9 • It is likely a few employees use the bus.
10 • Many McDonalds employees ride share.
11
12 Commission consensus:
13 • Agrees with staff's analysis.
14 • No other comments/recommendations/changes to Table 6.
15 • Likes the proposed project. It is aesthetically pleasing and a nice improvement to the
16 site/community.
17 • Recommends adding condition of approval that states: `The landscaping plan submitted as part of
18 the building permit plans shall be revised to include the following and is subject to staff review
19 and approval: A) No vegetation within three feet of the perimeter of the Valley Oak tree; and B) a
20 note indicating whether or not weed cloth will be used and is used that the weed clot shall be
21 permeable.
22
23 M/S Sanders/Whetrel to approve 1) the requested Site Development Permit based on the draft Findings
24 included in attachment 1 and subject to the Conditions of Approval included in attachment 2; and the
25 requested Use Permit based on the draft Findings included in attachment 3 and subject to draft
26 Conditions of Approval included in attachment 4 with modification as a project condition for adding
27 permeable weed cloth and a 36" vegetation free circumference for the Valley Oak trees for the
28 McDonalds Restaurant Building and Drive-Thru Reconstruction Outdoor Dining file No.: 12-07-SDP-UP-
29 PC located on 115 S. Orchard Avenue. Motion carried (3-0) with Commissioners Doble and Brenner
30 absent.
31
32 Chair Pruden: Requested clarification that the ledger stone shown tonight would be the material and
33 color used.
34
35 The aforementioned was confirmed by staff.
36
37 � SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS
38
39 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE MCDONALD'S
40 RESTAURANT AND DRIVE-THRU
41 115 NORTH ORCHARD AVENUE, APN 002-200-40
42 FILE NO: 12-07-UP-PC
43
44 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
45 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
46
47 1. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
48 Plan as described in the staff report and Table 1.
49
50 2. With the granting of the Exception to the minimum number of parking spaces required and the
51 granting of the Modifications to the landscaping requirements described below, the proposed
52 Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in Table 3 of the
53 staff report.
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 10
1 3. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Airport Compatibility requirements for
2 the B2 zone based on the following:
3
4 A. The existing restaurant building with Play Place, drive-thru, and site improvements would be
5 demolished and a new restaurant with drive-thru and site improvements would be
6 constructed. The Project also includes a Use Permit for outdoor dining. The new restaurant
7 building including outdoor dining would have fewer seats than the existing building with Play
8 Place.
9
10 B. Pursuant to B2 Infill Policy 2.1.6, low intensity restaurants, retail and offices are acceptable
11 uses in the B2 infill zone. The proposed Project would continue the existing restaurant use of
12 the site and would not result in an increase in intensity.
13
14 C. The In-Fill policy allows 90 people per acre for non-residential uses. Based on a .81 acre
15 parcel, the maximum density is 72 people (.81 acre x 90 people/acre). Based on the
16 information provided the applicant, most of the transactions are drive-thru and if distributed
17 throughout the hours of operation for the Project results in 37 drive-thru transactions per
18 hour. Ten employees would be on the maximum shift. Distributing the remaining transactions
19 throughout the operating hours result in 17 dining room transactions per hour. This would
20 result in an estimated 64 people on the site per hour. It is likely that most people except
21 employees are on the site far less than one hour and drive-thru customers are likely on the
22 site for less than 10 minutes.
23
24 D. Based on a 3,904 square foot building, the Project provides 89% open land which exceeds
25 the recommendation to provide a minimum of 30% of open land.
26
27 4. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the findings required by Zoning
28 Ordinance Section 9263(E)for approval of a Site Development Permit based on the following:
29
30 A. The proposed project would be similar in size and intensity of the previous use on the project
31 site and similar to the surrounding commercial properties.
32
33 B. There is an existing sidewalk along the North Orchard Avenue. A new sidewalk and curb
34 would be installed however it would be located along North Orchard Avenue and therefore
35 not changing the pedestrian circulation along North Orchard Avenue.
36
37 C. The project would move the existing driveways north and eliminate the third driveway. This
38 change would improve the traffic and pedestrian circulation and would make the flow for the
39 project site more convenient.
40
41 D. A pedestrian pathway from the existing public sidewalk has been included on the North
42 Orchard Avenue frontage.
43
44 E. Off-street parking and access to the drive-thru would be accessed from a new double wide
45 driveway crubcut off of North Orchard Avenue. The cars would enter and exit the site from
46 the one driveway with the exception of the driveway customers that choose to exit directly
47 from the drive-thru exit lane. The proposed new traffic circulation on the site would improve
48 the existing situation with respect to traffic on adjacent street.
49
50 F. The project including the relocation of the driveways was reviewed by the Public Works
51 Department and it was determined that it would not create a hazardous conditions.
52
53 G. Landscaping is proposed along all property lines of the project site and the project is required
54 to comply with the landscaping requirements of the C-1 Zone With the approved
55 modifications the project is generally consistent with these requirements.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 11
1
2 H. The site is not located in or adjacent to a residential zoning district.
3
4 5. The project complies with the C-1 height and setback requirements which are developed in order
5 to ensure adequate light and air and separation of uses. The project would not cut out light or air
6 or hinder the development or use of building in the neighborhood based on the following:
7
8 A. The surrounding properties are already developed. The proposed building would be located
9 in the on the site in a location that would maintain separation between the new building and
10 the existing development on the adjacent properties.
11 B. The project is appropriately designed as required by C-1 zone development standards. The
12 project received preliminary review by the Planning Commission and requires formal project
13 approval by the Planning Commission. This process ensures a quality project that would not
14 impair the value to properties or development.
15
16 6. The granting of the Modification to the Landscaping Requirement to provide 50% shade coverage
17 of all paved areas within 10 years of planting is based on the following:
18
19 A. The Zoning Ordinance requires a shade percentage to be achieved at 10 years, however the
20 code does not indicate how the shade coverage should be calculated, provide the canopy
21 size of various tree species at 10 years, or define the parking area that is subject to this
22 requirement.
23
24 B. Based on staff research, communities that have a shade ordinance most commonly use a 15
25 year tree canopy when calculating shade coverage. Staff was unable to find another
26 community that used a 10 year canopy for the purpose of calculating shade coverage.
27
28 C. Tree canopy size can double between 10 and 15 years.
29
30 D. Staff directed the applicant to use the City of Davis standard to calculate shade coverage.
31 Using the City of Davis standard, the Project would provide 55% shade coverage at 15 years.
32
33 E. Planning Commission has recently approved modifications to this requirement for projects
34 that complied with the Davis standard (Guillon Phase 2, School District Office Building).
35
36 7. The granting of the Modification to the Landscaping Requirement to provide a pedestrian pathway
37 through parking lots with more than 12 parking spaces is based on the following:
38
39 A. The Project includes an accessible path from the Orchard Avenue sidewalk, across the drive-
40 thru to the front of the building. The walkway includes decorative concrete.
41
42 B. Public Works reviewed the Project and has indicated that a sidewalk should not be provided
43 on the Perkins Street frontage since the sidewalk would not connect to any other sidewalk
44 east of the Project and they do not want to encourage people to walk in this area since there
45 is no sidewalk available. Public Works also requested that a fence be installed along the
46 Perkins Street frontage to prevent pedestrians from walking in this area of Perkins Street.
47
48 C. Since there is no sidewalk on the Perkins Street project frontage and Public Works is
49 recommending a fence in this location, there would be no way for a person to access a
50 pedestrian pathway that connected to the Perkins Street right-of-way.
51
52 8. The granting of the Modification to the Landscaping Requirement to provide a landscape planter
53 island with tree between every four parking spaces is based on the following:
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 12
1 A. The site constraints related to the size of the site, creating a functional drive-thru, and
2 creating a gateway quality landscaping plan, limit the opportunities for providing the required
3 landscape islands between parking spaces.
4
5 B. Further reducing the number of parking spaces in order to provide the island planters could
6 result in under parking the site and create circulation issues for the site and Orchard Avenue
7 when/if customers and/or employees cannot find parking on the site.
8
9 9. The granting of the Exception to the required number of onsite parking spaces is based on the
10 following:
11
12 A. In order to determine the number of parking spaces required, the number of spaces for the
13 restaurant including outdoor dining (32) is added to the number of spaces required for the
14 drive-thru (39). Since the drive-thru provides queuing for more vehicles than required and the
15 restaurant is also being parked, the number of parking spaces required should be the number
16 required for the restaurant plus the queuing required to serve the drive-thru. In this case, 32
17 parking spaces would be required for the restaurant plus the queuing for 13 vehicles in the
18 drive-thru. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide for this discretion except through the
19 approval of an Exception.
20
21 B. The applicant has indicated the drive-thru accounts for 65-70% of its business. Based on an
22 average of 1,000 transactions per day, 300 are handled in the restaurant. Spreading this
23 number of transactions over 18 overs (hours the dining room is open), results in 17
24 transactions per hour.
25
26 C. The applicant has indicated that with the removal of the Play Place, the length of the stay
27 would be reduced allowing parking stalls to turn-over more rapidly.
28
29 D. The Project provides eight bike parking spaces and is in an area of high employment density
30 which allows many people to walk to the site rather than drive.
31
32 This Exception requires the Project to provide 24 onsite parking spaces, queuing for 13 vehicles
33 in the drive-thru, and a minimum of eight bicycle parking spaces in order to provide adequate
34 onsite parking.
35
36 10. The proposed Project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
37 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15302 Class 2, Replacement or Reconstruction of Existing
38 Structures and Class 15303, Class based on the following:
39
40 A. The Project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable
41 general plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and
42 regulations based on the analysis in the staff report.
43
44 B. The Project consists of the reconstruction of a commercial (restaurant building with drive-
45 thru)with less square footage and less seating than the previous building. The use would be
46 continued with the reconstruction of the building.
47
48 C. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects in relations to traffic, noise,
49 air quality, or water quality because the project site located within a developed urban area
50 that contains existing similar type uses. The Project was referred to Caltrans for review and
51 comment. Caltrans did not have any comments on the Project and did not request a traffic
52 study. Public Works also reviewed the application and did not require a traffic study.
53
54 D. Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police Department
55 and Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public
56 services.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 13
1
2 11. Notice of the proposed Project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
3 Ordinance:
4
5 A. posted in three places on the project site on July 27, 2012;
6 B. mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on July 27, 2012; and
7 C. published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on July 29, 2012.
8
9
10 � CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
11
12 SITE DEVELOPMENT PEMRIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
13 CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESTAUANT BUILDING WITH DRIVE-THRU
14 AT 115 NORTH ORCHARD AVENUE, APN 002-200-40
15 FILE NO: 12-07-UP-PC
16
17 1. Approval is granted to allow construction of a new restaurant building with drive-thru and
18 associated site improvements as shown on the plans date stamped July 26, 2012 and as
19 described in the project description submitted to the Planning and Community Development
20 Department and date stamped July 26, 2012.
21
22 2. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff review and
23 approval:
24
25 A. Revised site plan showing location of sidewalk easement along Perkins Street frontage from
26 the corner of Orchard Avenue and Perkins Streets as shown on site plan date stamped July
27 27, 2012.
28 B. Removal of the accent lighting that outlines the building shown on the elevation plans.
29 C. Landscaping and irrigation plans and documentation that demonstrate compliance with the
30 State Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance and Cal Green requirements for
31 landscaping and irrigation.
32 D. Plans that show the location of all rooftop equipment and demonstrate that the equipment is
33 screened from view from the public way(s). Compliance may require submittal of sight lines,
34 building sections, and/or similar plans/exhibits to demonstrate compliance.
35
36 3. Prior to building permit final, a deed notice shall be recorded to advise that the property is located
37 in close proximity to the Ukiah Municipal Airport and is subject to occasional aircraft overflight and
38 may be subject to aircraft noise or related disturbances.
39
40 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written authorization from the property owner of the vacant
41 parcel located at the northwest corner of Orchard and Perkins Street (APN 002-200-38) allowing
42 the placement of the temporary power poles referenced in condition of approval number 9 shall
43 be submitted to the Planning and Electric Departments.
44
45 5. Prior to Building Permit Final, a "Trash Disposal Plan" shall be prepared by the applicant and
46 submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. The Plan shall address litter control,
47 trash collection, on-site storage, and pick-up on a regular basis. The Plan shall include proof of a
48 contract with the City disposal contractor, and specify that such a contract shall be maintained as
49 a requirement for the issuance and retention of the Site Development Permit.
50
51 6. With the granting of the Exception, the Project is required to provide onsite parking/queuing as
52 follows: 24 onsite vehicle parking spaces: queuing for 13 vehicles in the drive-thru: and a
53 minimum of eight bicycle parking spaces.
54
55 7. Signs require application for and approval of a Sign Permit from the Planning and Community
56 Development Department.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 14
1
2 8. Construction hours 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00
3 p.m. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and holidays recognized by the City of Ukiah.
4 Interior construction is exempt from these hours provided that construction noise is not audible at
5 the project property lines.
6
7 9. On plans submitted for building permit these conditions of approval shall be included as notes on
8 the first sheet.
9
10 From the Planninq Commission
11
12 10. The landscaping plan submitted as part of the building permit plans shall be revised to include the
13 following and is subject to staff review and approval:
14
15 A. No vegetation within three feet of the perimeter of the Valley oak trees; and
16 B. A note indicating whether or not weed cloth will be used and if used that the weed cloth shall
17 be permeable.
18
19 From the Electric Utility Department and City Attorney
20
21 11. To insure continued service to the tenant business known as Davita Dialysis located at 126 North
22 Orchard Ave, during electrical construction activities associated with this project, the City electric
23 department must construct temporary overhead primary service to the tenant. Project Proponent
24 shall be required to pay the electric departmenYs costs to install, maintain and remove the
25 temporary service. These costs shall include the fully loaded labor and equipment costs, and the
26 cost of consumable supplies, including hardware, poles, crossarms, conductors, cable and similar
27 items, to the extent these items cannot be returned to stock when the temporary service is no
28 longer required. The City shall provide an estimate of the costs which the project proponent shall
29 deposit with the City when a building permit is issued. After the temporary service is removed and
30 the project is complete, the City shall provide project proponent with an invoice of the final costs.
31 The City shall refund to the project proponent any portion of the deposit that exceeds the
32 estimate. If the actual costs exceed the estimate, the project proponent shall pay the City the
33 portion of the actual costs that exceed the estimate within thirty (30) days after it receives an
34 invoice from the City.
35
36 From the Public Works Department
37
38 12. A sidewalk easement extending easterly along the Perkins Street frontage from the corner of
39 Orchard and Perkins Street shall be granted to the City as shown on site plan date stamped July
40 26, 2012. The easement shall accommodate a minimum 5 foot wide sidewalk constructed at
41 existing back of curb and be dedicated to the City.
42
43 13. During relocation of the transformer serving the subject property, applicant shall ensure
44 continuous operation of the traffic signals at the Perkins StreeUOrchard Avenue intersection, with
45 oversight and coordination by the Electric Department and Public Works Department. After the
46 relocation work is completed, traffic signals shall be inspected by a third party traffic signal
47 inspector, paid for by the applicant, and any damage found to be caused by the applicanYs
48 operations shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
49 14. The landscaping plan shows improvements ending at Perkins Street right-of-way line.
50 Landscaping and irrigation shall be extended to the back of Perkins Street curb, and shall include
51 appropriate ground cover for the vegetated swales. Note that the Perkins Street right-of-way
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 15
1 fronting the project site is owned by the City of Ukiah, and any work in the City's right-of-way will
2 require an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department.
3
4 15. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from
5 Caltrans for the proposed drainage improvements and shall provide documentation of the issued
6 encroachment permit.
7
8 16. A grease interceptor will be required. Grease interceptors shall be sized in accordance with the
9 California Plumbing Code.
10
11 17. Any existing curb, gutter and sidewalk in disrepair that is adjacent to the subject property shall be
12 repaired. All work shall be done in conformance with the City of Ukiah Standard Drawing 101 and
13 102 or as directed by the City Engineer.
14
15 18. Site run-off over the public sidewalk should be avoided. Under-sidewalk drains (Standard
16 Drawing 410 ) may be used where necessary.
17
18 19. Strom drain inlet filters shall be installed and maintained in all on-site storm drains inlets within
19 paved areas.
20
21 20. All work within the public right-of-way shall be performed by a licensed and properly insured
22 contactor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within this area or
23 otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3% of estimated Public
24 Works Department.
25
26 21. Existing sewer laterals planned to be utilized as part of this project shall be cleaned and tested in
27 accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 1105, and repaired or replaced if required. If an
28 existing lateral is to be abandoned, it shall be abandoned at the main to the satisfaction of the
29 Public Works Department.
30
31 22. Any net increase in plumbing drainage fixture units will require payment of sewer connection fees
32 at the time of building permit issuance.
33
34 23. If required, there is a cost for City crews to construct new water main taps for water services.
35
36 24. All irrigation and fire services shall have approved backflow devices.
37
38 From the Buildinq Official
39
40 25. Building permit is required prior to demolition and reconstruction.
41
42 From the Fire Marshal
43
44 26. Separate Fire Department permits will be required for the sprinkler, kitchen hood, and the alarm
45 system.
46
47 From the Mendocino Countv Air Qualitv Manaaement District
48
49 27. An asbestos survey and notification is required prior to demolition of the existing building.
50
51 Standard Conditions
52
53 28. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
54 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
55 and issued/finaled.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 16
1 29. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
2 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
3
4 30. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law,
5 regulation, specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal
6 agencies as applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing,
7 occupancy, and structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building
8 Permit is approved and issued.
9
10 31. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
11 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
12
13 32. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
14 to building permit final.
15
16 33. This Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the
17 approved project related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these
18 stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the
19 effective date of this approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has
20 ceased or has been suspended for 24 consecutive months.
21
22 34. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Site Development Permit shall be granted only for the
23 specific purposes stated in the action approving the Site Development Permit and shall not be
24 construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except to such
25 specific purposes.
26
27 35. All required landscaping shall be properly maintained to insure the long-term health and vitality of
28 the plants, shrubs and trees. Proper maintenance means, but is not limited to the following:
29
30 A. Regular slow, deep watering when feasible. The amount of water used shall fluctuate
31 according to the season, i. e., more water in summer, less in the winter.
32
33 B. Additional watering shall occur during long periods of severe heat and drying winds, and
34 reduced watering shall be used during extended periods of cool rainy weather.
35
36 C. Fertilizer shall only being used on trees during planting. Shrubs may receive periodic fertilizer
37 according to the recommendations of a landscaping professional.
38
39 D. Weed killers shall not be used on or near trees.
40
41 E. The tree ties and stakes shall be checked every six months to ensure they do not constrict
42 the trunks and damage the trees.
43
44 F. Tree ties and stakes shall be removed after 1 to 3 years to ensure they do not damage the
45 trunk of the tree and its overall growth.
46
47 G. Any tree that dies or is unhealthy due to pests, disease or other factors, including vandalism,
48 shall be replaced with the same or similar tree species, or an alternative species approved by
49 the department of Planning and Community Development.
50
51 H. All trees shall be properly pruned as appropriate. No topping cuts shall be made. All pruning
52 shall follow standard industry methods and techniques to ensure the health and vitality of the
53 tree.
54
55 Failure to comply with the requirements listed above could result in revocation of the Use
56 PermiUSite Development Permit.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 17
1 36. The project shall comply with the following requirements to reduce air quality impacts related to
2 project construction:
3
4 A. All grading shall comply with Mendocino County Air Quality Management District Rule 1-430,
5 Fugitive Dust Emissions.
6
7 B. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and
8 building construction institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust,
9 particularly during windy days.
10
11 C. All inactive soil piles on the project site shall be completely covered at all times to control
12 fugitive dust.
13
14 D. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, and actual construction
15 shall include a program of washing off trucks leaving the construction site to control the
16 transport of mud and dust onto public streets.
17
18 E. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers, and bulldozers shall
19 be used for earth moving operations.
20
21 F. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous
22 gusts)exceed 25 miles per hour.
23
24 G. Adjacent roadways exposed to dust, dirt, or other soil particles by vehicles tires, poorly
25 covered truck loads, or other construction activities shall be cleaned each day prior to the end
26 of construction activities using methods approved by the Director of Public Works/City
27 Engineer.
28
29 37. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
30 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
31 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
32 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
33 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
34 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
35 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
36 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
37 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
38 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
39 remain in full force and effect.
40
41 � USE PERMIT FINDINGS
42 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF OUTDOOR DINING ASSOCIATED WITH THE
43 MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT
44 115 NORTH ORCHARD AVENUE, APN 002-200-40
45 FILE NO: 12-07-UP-PC
46
47 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
48 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
49
50 12. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
51 Plan as described in the staff report and Table 1.
52
53 13. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in
54 Table 2 of the staff report.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 18
1 14. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Airport Compatibility requirements for
2 the B2 zone based on the following:
3
4
5 A. The project will allow outside dining as an ancillary use to McDonalds reconstructed
6 restaurant with drive- thru and associated site improvements. The new restaurant will be
7 similar in intensity to the previous McDonalds and is consistent with low intensity retail uses
8 which are allowed in the B2 zone.
9
10 B. This Deed Notice has been included as a condition of approval (see condition 3 ).
11
12 C. The In-Fill policy allows 90 people per acre for non-residential uses. Based on a .81 acre
13 parcel, the maximum density is 72 people (.81 acre x 90 people/acre). Based on the
14 information provided the applicant, most of the transactions are drive-thru and if distributed
15 throughout the hours of operation for the Project results in 39 drive-thru transactions per
16 hour. Ten employees would be on the maximum shift. Distributing the remaining transactions
17 throughout the operating hours result in 17 dining room transactions per hour. This would
18 result in an estimated 56 people on the site per hour. It is likely that most people except
19 employees are on the site far less than one hour and drive-thru customers are likely on the
20 site for less than 10 minutes.
21
22 D. The size of the parcel is .81 acre. The proposed footprint of the building is 3,904 square feet,
23 leaving 89 % of open land (3,904 sf/35283 sf)which exceeds the amount recommended for
24 this zone.
25
26 15. The proposed project, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to public health, safety and general
27 welfare based on the following:
28 A. The permittee is responsible for maintain all outdoor dining furnishings and the outdoor dining
29 area in good condition, including but not limited to the following:
30
31 • All outdoor dining furnishings and all exterior surfaces within the outdoor dining area
32 shall be easily cleanable and kept clean and free of debris; and
33 • The outdoor dining area and adjacent areas shall be kept in a clean and safe
34 condition.
35
36 B. Prior to commencement of outdoor dining, a "Trash Disposal Plan" shall be prepared by the
37 applicant and submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. The Plan shall
38 address litter control, trash collection, on-site storage, and pick-up on a regular basis. The
39 Plan shall include proof of a contract with the City disposal contractor, and specify that such
40 a contract shall be maintained as a requirement for the issuance and retention of the Use
41 Permit( Condition of Approval#3 ) .
42
43 C. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official,
44 and Public Works and any review comments from these departments have been included as
45 conditions of approval.
46
47 D. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
48
49 16. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
50 Section 15302(b) Class 2, Replacement or Reconstruction of Existing Structures and Class
51 15303 Class 1(c), New Construction based on the following:
52
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 19
1 E. The Project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable
2 general plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and
3 regulations based on the analysis in the staff report.
4
5 F. The Project consists of the reconstruction of a commercial (restaurant building with drive-
6 thru)with less square footage and less seating than the previous building. The use would
7 be continued with the reconstruction of the building.
8
9 G. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects in relations to traffic,
10 noise, air quality, or water quality because the project site located within a developed
11 urban area that contains existing similar type uses. The Project was referred to Caltrans
12 for review and comment. Caltrans did not have any comments on the Project and did not
13 request a traffic study. Public Works also reviewed the application and did not require a
14 traffic study.
15
16 H. Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police
17 Department and Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities
18 and public services.
19
20 17. Notice of the proposed project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
21 Ordinance:
22 A. posted in three places on the project site on July 27, 2012;
23 B. mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on July 27, 2012
24 C. published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on July 29, 2012;
25
26 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—USE PERMIT
27 USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW OUTSIDE DINING
28 AT 115 NORTH ORCHARD AVENUE, APN 002-200-40
29 FILE NO: 12-07-UP-PC
30
31 38. Approval is granted to allow outside dining in association with the new restaurant building and
32 drive-thru as shown on the plans date stamped July 26, 2012 and as described in the project
33 description submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department and date
34 stamped July 26, 2012.
35
36 39. The permittee is responsible for maintain all outdoor dining furnishings and the outdoor dining
37 area in good condition, including but not limited to the following:
38
39 E. All outdoor dining furnishings and all exterior surfaces within the outdoor dining area shall be
40 easily cleanable and kept clean and free of debris; and
41
42 F. The outdoor dining area and adjacent areas shall be kept in a clean and safe condition.
43
44 40. Outdoor dining is limited to seating for up to 12 people as shown on the approved site plan.
45
46 41. Prior to commencement of outdoor dining, a "Trash Disposal Plan" shall be prepared by the
47 applicant and submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. The Plan shall address
48 litter control, trash collection, on-site storage, and pick-up on a regular basis. The Plan shall
49 include proof of a contract with the City disposal contractor, and specify that such a contract shall
50 be maintained as a requirement for the issuance and retention of the Use Permit.
51
52 42. Outdoor dining is limited to 12 seats due to the number of onsite parking spaces provided (see
53 site development permit condition of approval 6). The Planning Director may approve additional
54 outdoor seating as part of the outdoor dining with the installation additional bike parking spaces.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 20
1 The number of bike parking spaces required will be determined by the Planning Director based
2 on the number of additional seats proposed in the outdoor dining area. The required bike racks
3 shall be installed prior to the installation of additional seating for the outdoor dining area.
4
5 Standard Conditions
6
7 43. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
8 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
9 and issued/finaled.
10
11 44. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
12 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
13
14 45. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
15 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
16 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
17 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
18 and issued.
19
20 46. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
21 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
22
23 47. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
24 to building permit final.
25
26 48. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
27 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
28 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
29 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
30 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
31
32 49. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the use permit shall be granted only for the specific
33 purposes stated in the action approving the Use Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating
34 or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except to such specific purposes.
35
36 50. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
37 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
38 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
39 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
40 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
41 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
42 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
43 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
44 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
45 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
46 remain in full force and effect.
47
48 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
49 Staff:
50 • The Zoning Administrator will review a Minor Use Permit for Halloween City to operate at the
51 former Ukiah Valley Lumber retail store on S. State Street on August 16, 2012
52 • An ordinance to adopt procedures for line adjustments and parcel mergers recently went to
53 Council and an ordinance was introduced to amend the Subdivision Ordinance. Adoption of the
54 ordinance is on the City Council Consent Calendar in September.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 21
1 • The Planning Commission will be reviewing the UVMC expansion project and corresponding
2 Environmental Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project at the next
3 regular meeting on August 22, 2012.
4 • On September 5, 2012, City Council is scheduled to have a General Plan consistency analysis
5 discussion with the City Attorney. Planning Commissioners are encouraged to attend.
6
7 Commissioner Sanders: What is prompting the General Plan consistency discussion?
8
9 Staff: As part of the Walmart Expansion project and other projects, questions have arisen as to how
10 General Plan goals and policies have been applied to projects in the past. The intent is for the City
11 Council to discuss how General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures are applied to
12 development projects.
13
14 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
15 Chair Pruden will not be present for the first Planning Commission meeting in September.
16
17 Commissioner Sanders reported that September 15 is International Coast Clean-up Day where Friends
18 of Gibson Creek, the Wagenseller Neighborhood and Friends of Low Gap Park will be participating in a
19 creek clean-up creek at Ford Street and Brush Street.
20
21 12. ADJOURNMENT
22 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:43 p.m.
23
24
25 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
26
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 8, 2012
Page 22