HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_12122012 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 December 12, 2012
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair
7 Kevin Doble
8 Linda Sanders
9 Mike Whetzel
10
11 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
12 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
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 October 24, 2012 are included for review and
26 approval.
27
28 M/S Doble/Whetzel to approve the October 24, 2012 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried 3-0 with
29 Commissioner Sanders abstaining.
30
31 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
32
33 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters at this meeting, the
34 final date to appeal is December 26, 2012.
35
36 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
37
38 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by staff.
39
40 9. PUBLIC HEARING
41 9A. Haskins Mixed Use Project (File No: 12-13-UP-SDP-PC). 528 North State Street. APN 002-
42 146-11. Planning Commission consideration and possible action on a: 1) Use Permit to allow
43 single-room occupancy units and a mixed commercial and residential project: and 2) Site
44 Development Permit for site development and improvements.
45
46 Associate Planner Faso presented the staff report and noted that the applicant is no longer requesting a
47 variance to allow the detached storage units/laundry facilities proposed along the rear property line to be
48 three feet from the rear property. Instead the applicant has revised to plans so that the structure complies
49 with the required five foot setback.
50
51 Staff provided the Commission with copies of the missing elevations nos. 8, 9, and 10 inadvertently
52 omitted from the plans attached to the staff report.
53
54 Chair Pruden: Inquired if the traffic light at the intersection of Norton Street and North State will
55 somehow be coordinated/matched with the driveway for the Project?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 1
1 Staff: The existing traffic signal will be upgraded to take care of the entire intersection. The driveway will
2 be treated as a street so it will be signalized facing west. The applicant will pay for the traffic
3 improvements.
4
5 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:12 p.m.
6
7 Martin Breue, Ruff&Associates provided an overview of the Project:
8
9 Kathleen Porzio:
10 • She and her husband own the adjacent commercial property to the north of the Project on N.
11 State Street.
12 • Expressed concern about the tenants that will be living in a very small concentrated area with
13 only 12 parking spaces and a small entrance.
14 • Is also concerned about the Project occurring in the neighborhood primarily with regard to safety
15 and liability, particularly for children who may reside in the complex that could possibly get hurt by
16 someone backing out in the parking lot since the property is small for the type of mixed-use
17 project proposed and the space constrained/limited.
18 • Would like to see a fence and/or some type of boarder between her property and the subject
19 property. The Project is problematic from the perspective that tenants would be able to access
20 her driveway and park without some sort of fence or boarder.
21 • Street parking for the area is limited and there is no parking on Scott Street.
22 • Questioned whether or not 12 parking spaces would be sufficient with the different living units/
23 two commercial units on the ground floor and the number of persons living, working and visiting in
24 the complex.
25 • Was unaware that one of the proposed project conditions of approval is a fence along the
26 northern and southern boundaries.
27 • Would like to see a six-foot high fence.
28 • Has owned her property for many years and there was fencing at one time.
29 • Has lived in high density areas and has rentals in high density areas so does not object to the
30 Project in this regard but has concerns about the potential for safety and liability issues with
31 tenants trespassing.
32
33 Frank Porzio:
34 • Installed a wooden fence when the property was first purchased.
35 • When one of the houses on the subject property burned, it also destroyed the fence and the
36 fence has not been replaced.
37 • The fence needs to be 6 feet tall.
38 • While a simple wooden fence would likely be his preference, it would probably be hit by vehicles.
39 It may be the fencing should be constructed with cement in the area where a vehicle can access
40 his property from the subject property.
41 • Commented on the property line and noted the existing post holes where the fence used to be
42 are on the property line for the two parcels. Does not want tenants encroaching on his driveway.
43
44 Commission:
45 • The Porzio's should likely consider putting an after-hours gate or post with chain across the
46 access driveway entrance from State Street to discourage access that would connect to the
47 fencing along the northern portion of the property to prevent access from this portion/side of the
48 parcel.
49 • It appears Building 1 located to the north is at zero lot line so there is a barrier right there.
50 • What occurs when the fence is not shown on the plans, is such a fence needs to be constructed
51 on the lot line and this line needs to be verified by a surveyor/civil engineer. With a building
52 constructed at zero lot line, the fence is usually built right on the line.
53 • Recognizes parking is problematic in the area.
54
55 Rod Vargas:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 2
1 • Owns the auto parts store and adjacent property to the south of the Project.
2 • Does not support the proposed type of mixed-use development for the site. The site is too small
3 for the number of units proposed and anticipated number of persons living in those unites. There
4 is little open space for the tenants. The Project is unrealistic.
5 • The tenants will have visitors, which will add to the parking problem on the site and in the area.
6 • When the subject property had three residential units on it, he experienced problems with the
7 tenants, particularly with people parking in his parking lot.
8 • Does not see the need for SRO units in Ukiah.
9 • Tenants/visitors will continue to park in his parking lot and that of Porzio's even if a wall and/or
10 fence is constructed.
11 • Has a `tow-away' sign for violators in his parking lot.
12 • Is concerned about the type of tenants that will be living in the units.
13
14 Chair Pruden:
15 • The Project is not subsidized housing. The units will rent at fair market value so there will be more
16 of an up-scale group of persons living there.
17 • Suggests Mr. Vargas put a chain in the parking lot after business hours to deter tenants/other
18 persons from parking in his lot.
19 • The Project is zoned C-1 and meets all the Code requirements for this zoning designation.
20 • More parking would be good for the project, but in order to accomplish this, there would have to
21 be a reduction in density and this would not pencil out financially for the applicant. Also, the
22 Planning Commission would have to make findings to justify a decision in this regard, for
23 instance.
24 • The Commission will provide some ideas for fencing if the Project is approved.
25
26 Rod Vargas:
27 • There will not likely be much up-scale living in a 400 sq. ft. unit.
28 • Does not want people from this development parking on his parcel.
29 • Provided certain measures to eliminate impacts to his property for the previous residential
30 development on this parcel which has since been torn down.
31 • Is concerned about property lines, particularly the space between his property line and a potential
32 fence with regard to liability issues.
33
34 Chair Pruden:
35 • The Project has to meet all legal requirements.
36 • Asked the applicant to speak on a possible compromise(s) on what can be done to be a good
37 neighbor.
38
39 Martin Breue:
40 • The intent has always been to create a project that greatly benefits the community by providing
41 live/work situations/affordable housing, is aesthetically pleasing/energy efficienUapplies green
42 building standards/concepts and materials.
43 • Referred to the site plans and explained the nature of the project and the reason for the proposed
44 layout in association with the proposed buildings/accessory building/carports/landscaping and
45 parking arrangements as this relates to traffic and pedestrian circulation onsite. Showed changes
46 to landscaping made on the site plan to improve onsite parking/pedestrian circulation.
47 • The applicant intends to construct fencing where feasible.
48
49 Commission:
50 • Discussion regarding the distance between the edge of the subject property and the building
51 owned by Mr. Vargas.
52 • Confirmed Building 2 is at zero lot line.
53 • Requested clarification about the option referenced in the staff report about creating an
54 additional parking space located to the north of the property?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 3
1 Staff: What staff is pointing out on page 6 of the staff report is the need for the parking to be
2 reconfigured in order to be functional by possibly eliminating a planter and relocating items such as the
3 bike racks.
4
5 Martin Breue:
6 • Indicated the subject property has been surveyed by a civil engineer. The distance between the
7 property line of the subject property and the building owned by Mr. Vargas is five feet.
8 • Focused on how the parking for the site will be improved by eliminating landscaping, making the
9 utility room smaller and rearranging the location of objects such as the bicycle rack. These
10 changes will allow for wider parking spaces and a better functioning parking lot. The number of
11 parking spaces will not increase as a result.
12 • The location of the Project encourages people to walk to stores, eateries and services as
13 opposed to driving.
14
15 Patrick Haskins:
16 • Would like his project to be neighborhood friendly and is willing to do what is necessary to
17 accomplish this objective.
18 • It may be a good idea to place a chain across the entrance to the driveways located to the north
19 and south of his property and/or provide signage that cars will be towed away if they are not
20 patrons of the business.
21 • The Project is essentially targeting single persons and/or college persons that have one car
22 because the Project is a `compact community.'
23 • The buildings are designed to be architecturally pleasing/welcoming/clean where, for instance,
24 parents of college students can feel comfortable about their children living there.
25 • Likes the Project design.
26 • Supports the installation of fencing.
27
28 Chair Pruden:
29 • Questioned the function of the balconies on the two rear buildings where the primary function
30 would likely be for air ventilation purposes.
31 • Supports that the roof/awning above the balconies be canted downward at an angle for shade
32 purposes as opposed to extending outward.
33 • Likes that the front building has slider windows on the top floor providing for a contemporary
34 appearance. Would like to see the awning for the building be canted downward at an angle as
35 opposed to extending outward as a design consideration.
36 • Concerned about some of the tree species selected for the Project even though the species are
37 from the City's Master Tree list. Dogwood will not provide adequate shade for the parking lot.
38 Washington Hawthorne are quite small trees and do not get much bigger than Crape Myrtle.
39 There are three other species planted on N. State Street that would be a better choice.
40 • Asked about the vegetative species for the living wall.
41
42 Martin Breue:
43 • Explained how the living wall functions and is irrigated.
44 • The plant species can vary and would be of a vine composition.
45
46 Commissioner Sanders:
47 • Suggested to possibility removing two L-shaped storage units in the rear of the property that are
48 located on the southwest side (where it doglegs) so that the apartment building could be moved
49 westerly that would provide for greater space for turning and maneuverability in the parking lot.
50 Accordingly, more storage could be provided in the covered parking area, such as cabinets or
51 shelving.
52 • Understands that storage facilities are important to the tenants living in the complex because the
53 living units are very small.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 4
1 • Is of the opinion the parking lot is `very tighY and with moving a building westerly would allow for
2 more space in the parking area, especially with all the activity this community will be generating
3 from a safety standpoint.
4 • Likes the Project and corresponding design.
5 • Asked about mitigation for sound proofing in the buildings. Understands while the windows will be
6 tripled-glazed in the various apartments what other sounding proofing mechanisms will be
7 featured?
8 • Will the storage facility have electricity inside?
9 • Will pavers be used in place of cement for the pedestrian walkways?
10 • Will the window in the apartments open?
11
12 Richard Ruff, Ruff 8�Associates:
13 • Met with the residential neighbor to the rear/west to discuss the project. He was pleased with the
14 location of the storage facilities on the west side of the subject property because they will act as a
15 `buffer' to the apartments. The residential neighbor is of the opinion the apartment buildings in the
16 rear of the property were very close to his back property line.
17 • Does not support moving the storage facility. Nothing would be accomplished by moving it. It is
18 not possible to make the parking lot any larger and still meet the parking requirements. If
19 anything, the parking spaces need more width on the lot itself. The reason for originally
20 requesting a variance was to allow the detached storage units/laundry facilities along the rear
21 property line to be three feet from the rear property line rather the required setback of five feet.
22 The project was revised to comply with the five-foot setback. The property line will be fenced at
23 the property line because the applicant does not want people behind the storage facility. The
24 same will occur along the property line for the auto parts business located to the south of the
25 Project where it is three or four feet from the business building to the property line. The fenced
26 area will prevent people from getting between the fence and the building.
27
28 Staff:
29 • The Code requires a backup distance of 24 feet for the parking stalls. The Project, as designed,
30 allows for one more foot of backup distance than what is required by the Code.
31 • Included as part of the conditions of approval in order to make the parking area more functional,
32 the end stalls and carport spaces must be standard spaces which are required to be 9-feet wide
33 and 19-feet deep.
34
35 Martin Breue:
36 • The walls will feature sound proof materials including sound proof insulation. Adequate space will
37 be provided for the walls dividing the individual apartments. Also, the dividing walls between
38 apartments will not be touching one another.
39 • The storage units will have electricity.
40 • Confirmed pavers will be used for the interior walkways.
41 • Confirmed the windows in the apartments will be operable.
42
43 Chair Pruden:
44 • Referred to Attachment 3, lighting features, and inquired about the `all metal Gooseneck Barn
45 LighY and/or `Other Gooseneck Lighting' will be featured for the exterior buildings/parking lot?
46 Gooseneck lighting fixtures are very pleasing and appear to fit well with the design of the Project.
47 • The Planning Commission has some concerns about lighting for commercial developments in
48 terms of aesthetics to avoid a 100-watt bulb in a ceramic fixture scenario.
49 • Will the lighting be 24-hour onsite or will there be a motion detector? What about pathway
50 lighting? The intent for projects is to avoid light pollution while effectively addressing security
51 issues.
52
53 Commissioner poble:
54 • Asked to demonstrate where the rainwater catchment system will be located. Has a rain water
55 storage system been designed?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 5
1 • The Grading and Drainage Plan notes all runoff is to be directed to the onsite drainage system for
2 final distribution to the City's storm drain system, which contradicts the rainwater catchment
3 concept.
4 • An issue associated with the rainwater catchment system as being part of the Project is the
5 potential to draw/attract insects such as mosquitoes resulting from water that is just sitting for a
6 long period of time.
7 • Recommends crafting a condition of approval that deals with issues associated with a rainwater
8 catchment system that would include a maintenance plan and that the system design plans be
9 shown on the building permit plans.
10 • Asked about the joint power pole and guide wire on the sidewalk located in front of building 2 and
11 where this would be relocated to. The traffic study states the pole will be relocated and there is a
12 note on the Grading and Drainage Plan that also states the pole is to be relocated. There is a
13 guide wire that comes across the sidewalk and into the property where building 2 will be located.
14 Guide wires associated with power poles cannot just be put anywhere because it must be parallel
15 to the `line run' so the pole will likely have to be moved. Would like to see where the power pole
16 and guide wire will go. Brings up the subject because the plans indicate the power pole/guide
17 wire will be moved and normally when an appurtenance of this kind is to be moved, the location is
18 specified.
19 • With regard to the Project conditions from the Fire Department concerning the fire lanes, no
20 parking and striping there is a reference to these issues in the construction drawings and asked if
21 the applicant has envisioned where these areas are on the parking plan?
22 • Fire Department standards typically require a 15-foot clearance on either side of the designated
23 fire lane from vegetation/over-hangs/eves/planter areas and it appears the Project is not in
24 compliance. Likes the planter area in the middle of the parking area because it provides for an
25 anesthetically pleasing presentation as one enters the development but does not comply with the
26 15-foot fire clearance rule.
27 • With regard to trash pick-up, the site plans show bins and inquired whether they will be rolled out
28 to the curb or remain in place for pick-up. If the bins were moved to the street for pick-up and the
29 street is designated as `No Parking', it is likely the bins would be put in the area and left until pick-
30 up.
31 • How many parking spaces would remain on S. State Street? Is there room for a couple of cars to
32 park in front of the development or is this designated as `No Parking?'
33 • Is signage being proposed for the parking lot giving notification that during business hours it is
34 acceptable to park, but after hours if one is not a resident, he/she cannot utilize the parking
35 facilities? Would the applicant be amenable to a condition to ensure that parking is available for
36 residents of the Project? Such a sign would give the tenants a sense that they would not be stuck
37 without a parking spot.
38
39 Chair Pruden:
40 • It may be the power pole and guide wire is a City responsibility and the Planning Commission has
41 no say about the location, but rather the City Public Works Department would make a
42 determination in this regard.
43 • The proposed signage about after hours parking is likely just informational and probably not
44 enforceable.
45 • Commented on the effectiveness of another mixed-use project on E. Perkins Street that has a
46 nail and hair salon business and four residential units on the site. The residential tenants are not
47 at home in the day time so their parking spots are used by the commercial business and when
48 the businesses closes for the day, the parking is available again to the residential tenants. Has
49 observed this type of situation works very well so the day to night switch over is highly possible
50 for the proposed Project.
51 • If there are parking problems, a tenant can always contact the on-site manager.
52 • One advantage to living in the proposed new development is a person can walk to everything.
53
54 Martin Breue:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 6
1 • Explained the lighting plan features and placement and noted all exterior lighting will be recessed
2 and downcast. Gooseneck lighting fixtures are part of the lighting plan.
3 • There will be permanent lighting for the entrance and mostly likely the rest of the lighting will be
4 motion sensor.
5 • Rain water storage will likely occur in the rear garden.
6 • Parking for the tenants will be assigned.
7
8 Richard Ruff:
9 • Has consulted with the City concerning the power pole and how this could be managed. The City
10 Electric Department came up with a concept of installing a bottle transformer on the top of the
11 pole so it would not have to be moved, as well as address the guide wire. The guide wire will be
12 removed and the power pole will remain.
13 • The location of the fire lanes/no parking and striping will primarily be the driveway coming into the
14 complex. The area will be red curbed and the Fire Marshal has indicated there is ample space for
15 a T-turn in the complex. The Fire Marshal further indicated it is unlikely a fire truck would actually
16 access the property, but rather just take in a hose.
17 • In terms of the 50-foot clearance of vegetation/objects regarding the fire lane requirements and in
18 this case the planter in the access lane, the Fire Marshall indicated fire trucks would simply run
19 over it in the event of a fire emergency. The reason the middle planter should remain as part of
20 the project is because it makes cars slow down when they enter the apartment complex in order
21 to make it through the access lane.
22 • Will consult with the garbage company about the most effective approach to trash pick-up. Would
23 like to get recycling going where tenants have separate cans. The garbage company will likely
24 have to come into the property to pick up the trash and recycling.
25 • There is an on-street parking space in front of the State Farm building at Scott Street and S. State
26 Street. Most of the street in and around the proposed development is `No Parking' because it is in
27 the middle of the intersection.
28 • Would be amendable to signage to ensure that parking is available for residents of the Project
29 and to prevent residents, business owners, and their clients/customers parking on adjacent
30 properties. Agrees informational signage should be installed in the parking lot that notifies drivers
31 of the parking hours for the commercial businesses on the site and that parking on adjacent
32 properties is prohibited.
33
34 Rod Vargas:
35 • Asked about the reason for the proposed variance and understands the request has been
36 withdrawn.
37 • Asked about the property lines and the determinations related to fencing.
38 • His property was a gas station at one time and has knowledge of the property lines, but will verify
39 them.
40
41 Richard Ruff: All fencing will be constructed on the applicanYs property line.
42
43 Commissioner Whetzel:
44 • According to a survey document the commercial building owned by Mr. Vargas was not
45 constructed on the property line, but rather is approximately four to five feet from the property
46 line.
47 • Would like to see a two-foot stone wall with a fence on top for the Vargas commercial building.
48 This would stop cars from hitting the building.
49
50 Chair Pruden: It is important property lines are precise. In the C-1 zone, a building is allowed to be
51 constructed at zero lot line, but the fire department has certain requirements for fire proofing.
52
53 There was further Commission discussion about possible solutions such as construction of a barrier to
54 prevent dents to the Vargas commercial building.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 7
1 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:18 p.m.
2
3 Staff indicated a Sign Permit is required for the Project and has been included as a condition of approval.
4 For a Sign Permit, staff is required to look at the sign area and location for compliance with the Sign
5 Ordinance. The applicants can design a sign of his/her choice unless the Commission conditions the
6 project otherwise. Site Development Permits are required to include sign details. The only signs proposed
7 for the project would be associated with the commercial spaces that front onto North State Street.
8 Although the applicant has proposed only window signs, the sign ordinance would also allow wall
9 mounted signs and/or freestanding signs. Staff requests direction from the Commission on the types and
10 location of any future wall and/or freestanding signs for the Project site.
11
12 There was Commission discussion concerning signage for the commercial buildings particularly whether
13 or not a building mounted sign should be allowed, limited locations for building mounted signs due to the
14 green wall and windows, and lack of space for a freestanding sign. Agreed that signage should be limited
15 to the first floor level.
16
17 Staff referred to Condition of Approval No. 9 that states, 'All signs shall be designed to be compatible with
18 the architectural style of the buildings. Signs require application for and approval of a Sign Permit from
19 the Planning and Community Development Department.' This condition does refer to the architectural
20 aspect of the buildings that the Commission has concerns about. If the Commission's preference is
21 window signs, such signs are limited to 25% of window coverage. Condition of Approval No. 9 allows for
22 the window signs as proposed by the applicant and any other type of signage that meets the Sign
23 Ordinance requirements provided the sign(s)are designed in a manner that is consistent thereof.
24
25 Commission comments:
26 • The fencing should be aesthetically pleasing and compatible with the Project without having to be
27 custom made and/or too expensive since the applicant has to pay for the traffic improvements for
28 the intersection that is very costly.
29 • Possibly add language to the lease agreement that tenants are not allowed to park in the
30 surrounding properties.
31 • It may be necessary for neighboring properties to put a chain across their driveways to prevent
32 people from parking in their lots after business hours.
33 • Supports staff's recommendation for signage as provided for in Condition of Approval No. 9.
34 • Agrees with staff's analysis of the Project as provided for in tables 1 through 5 of the staff report.
35 • Is fine with staff's recommendation regarding the parking.
36
37 Commission consensus:
38
39 Commission further discussed the issues of fencing, rainwater catchment system and incorporating a
40 Ventor Control Plan, signage for parking hours, management plan, and appropriate street tree species
41 and added the following conditions of approval:
42
43 1. To prevent access to the parcels to the north and south and to prevent vehicles from potentially
44 backing into buildings, a two-foot wall shall be installed on the north and south boundaries of the
45 parking lot. The material for the wall shall be block, concrete or similar material that will withstand
46 a vehicle backing into the wall. A four-foot fence shall be installed on the top of the wall for a total
47 maximum fence and wall height of 6-feet. Cyclone fencing is prohibited. The location, materials,
48 and details for the wall shall be shown on plans submitted for building permit and are subject to
49 staff review and approval.
50
51 2. If the Project includes a rainwater catchment system, the system shall be shown on building
52 permit plans and shall include a Vector Control Plan and Maintenance Plan. The rainwater
53 catchment system, Vector Control Plan, and Maintenance Plan are subject to review and
54 approval by the Public Works Department.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 8
1 3. In order to ensure that parking is available for residents of the Project and to prevent parking of
2 residents, business owners, and their clients/customers on adjacent properties, informational
3 signage shall be installed in the parking lot that notifies drivers of the parking hours for the
4 commercial businesses on the site and that parking on adjacent properties is prohibited. Plans
5 submitted for building permit shall include the location, size, and content of the signage and is
6 subject to staff review and approval.
7
8 4. In order to ensure the planting of an appropriate street tree given the constraints of the location
9 (overhead wires and confined root spaces), the street tree species shall be Eastern Redbud,
10 Washington Hawthorne, or Purple Leaf Plum. The species shall be identified on the plans
11 submitted for building permit and is subject to staff review and approval.
12
13 5. The Management Plan required in condition #5 and approved by staff shall be provided to all
14 tenants as part of the lease agreement, and tenants shall agree to comply with applicable
15 requirements of the Management Plan as part of the lease agreement.
16
17 M/S Doble/Whetzel to approve Haskins Mixed Use Project File No: 12-13-UP-SDP-PC with Findings 1-
18 11 in Attachment 1 and Conditions of Approval 1-43 in Attachment 2 with the additional conditions of
19 approval referenced above. Motion carried (4-0).
20
21 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A
22 MIXED USE PROJECT AND SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY UNITS
23 528 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-146-11
24 FILE NO: 12-13-UP-SDP-VAR-PC
25
26 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
27 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
28
29 1. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan as
30 described in the staff report and Table 1.
31
32 2. With the granting of the Use Permit to allow mixed residential and commercial land uses on one
33 parcel the project is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in Table 2 of the staff report.
34
35 3. The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient
36 vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern based on the analysis included in Table 4 of the staff report,
37 including the following:
38
39 A. Based on the traffic study that was prepared the existing traffic signal would be required to be
40 upgraded as part of the project.
41 B. A new driveway would be installed that would line up the existing intersection and allow for a
42 more uniform intersection.
43 C. New ADA ramp would be installed as part of the new driveway.
44 D. Pedestrian pathway would connect the public sidewalk to all three buildings.
45
46 4. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic on
47 adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses
48 based on the following:
49
50 A. Off-street parking located at the center of the project would be accessed from a new driveway
51 curbcut off of North State Street. The cars would enter and exit the site from the one driveway.
52 The new driveway would line up with the existing intersection and would be located between the
53 two front buildings.
54 B. The project including the relocation of the driveway was reviewed by the Public Works
55 Department and it was determined with the recommended upgrades noted in the traffic study that
56 the project would not create a hazardous conditions.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 9
1
2 5. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the
3 proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and screening
4 large expanses of paved areas.
5
6 A. The buildings are located at the frontage line of North State Street which is the preferred building
7 location for urban scale, pedestrian oriented development. This location provides no ability for
8 landscape screening. However, the fa�ade of these building includes a "living wall"which
9 introduces"green space" at the front of the site. The Project includes two street trees as
10 required. The open parking area is small and located in the center of the site, eliminating the
11 need for screening. However, the parking plan does include the planting of dogwood trees. The
12 majority of the landscaping provided is functional landscaping intended to provide the residents
13 with usable outdoor space and screen/separate the Project from the residential property to the
14 rear(west). The landscaping provided is consistent with that of a higher density, urban-scale,
15 mixed-use project.
16 B. A final landscaping plan is required at the time of building permit(see draft conditions of
17 approval).
18
19 6. The project complies with the C1 height and setback requirements, with the exception of the rear
20 setbacks for the proposed detached storage units. Zoning Code standards are developed in order to
21 ensure adequate light and air and separation of uses. The project would not cut out light or air or
22 hinder the development or use of building in the neighborhood based on the following:
23
24 A. The surrounding properties are already developed. The proposed building would be in a location
25 that would maintain separation between the new building and the existing development on
26 adjacent properties.
27 B. The project is appropriately designed as required by C1 zone development standards. The
28 project received preliminary review by the Planning Commission and requires formal project
29 approval by the Planning Commission. This process ensures a quality project that would not
30 impair the value to properties or development.
31
32 7. The Mixed Use Project will not be detrimental to the public's health , safety and general welfare
33 based on the following:
34
35 A. The Project would provide 12 parking spaces that would be used by the residents and the
36 commercial customers. It is anticipated that the residents of the project would be away from the
37 site during business hours allowing for parking availability for the commercial units. Based on the
38 small size of the commercial spaces, any use would be likely to generate little parking demand.
39 The site is located in an area that would allow many people to walk or bike to the site and bike
40 parking is provided for employees/customers. The amount of parking provided is consistent with
41 the parking requirements.
42 B. A Traffic Study was prepared for the project and reviewed by the Public Works Department. The
43 applicant is required to comply with the recommendations and make the necessary upgrades to
44 the intersection and the existing traffic signal at Norton Street and State Street.
45 C. The Project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official, and
46 Public Works and any review comments from these departments have been included as
47 conditions of approval.
48 D. The Project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
49
50 8. The SRO component of the project will not be detrimental to the public's health , safety and general
51 welfare based on the following:
52
53 A. The project would provide a total of 12 parking spaces; three of which are required for the SRO
54 use. The Project would have 12 bike parking spaces; three of which are required for the SRO
55 use.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 10
1 B. As required, a management plan for the SRO units has been submitted with this application and a
2 condition of approval has been included requiring additional information and requirements as part
3 of the Management Plan.
4 C. One of the units would be occupied by an on-site manager and this would be required to be
5 included as part of the revised Management Plan.
6 D. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official, and
7 Public Works and any review comments from these departments have been included as
8 conditions of approval.
9 E. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
10 F. The standard condition of approval for construction hours has been applied to the Project.
11
12 9. The proposed Project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
13 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects based on the following:
14
15 A. The project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable general
16 plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and regulations
17 based on the analysis included in the staff report.
18 B. The project is located within city limits; the parcel size is 11,908 square feet; and the Project site
19 is surrounded by urban uses.
20 C. The site was previously developed with a building and associated parking and driveways. The
21 previous site development was demolished, leaving the pavement from the driveway and parking
22 area. The remainder of the site is covered in weeds and grasses. The lot has no value as
23 habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The site contains no trees, water courses, or
24 habitat and is located in an area developed with urban uses.
25 D. Approval of this project would not result in any significant effects in relations to traffic, noise, air
26 quality or water quality based on the following:
27
28 ■ A Traffic Study was prepared for the Project submitted with the application and reviewed by
29 Public Works and the applicant is required to comply with the recommendations of the July
30 12, 2012 study.
31
32 ■ A condition of approval has been applied to the Project limiting the hours of construction and
33 the Project is required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, noise impacts
34 are not typically associated with the type and size of uses included in the Project.
35
36 ■ The Project was referred to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District and no
37 comments were received; and
38
39 ■ The Project was referred to the Public Works Department and based on that review and
40 Condition of Approval has been added to the project that prior to construction a final grading
41 plan and drainage plan, and an erosion and sediment control plan prepared by a Civil
42 Engineer shall be required to be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works
43 Department.
44 E. Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police Department and
45 Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by the required utilities and public services.
46
47 10. Twelve parking spaces are provided for this project which is adequate based on the following:
48
49 A. Parking complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance in terms of number of
50 parking spaces provided.
51 B. The commercial spaces for this project would be small and a low intensity use therefore
52 parking is adequate.
53 C. The project is located close to transit corridor and within a walkable neighborhood.
54 D. Bicycle parking is provided
55 E. Based on the small size of the units tenants would probably only have one vehicle.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 11
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 November 30, 2012;
6 B. mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on November 30, 2012; and
7 C. published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on December 2, 2012.
8
9 USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
10 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A
11 MIXED USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES SINGLE-ROOM OCCUPANCY UNITS
12 528 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-146-11
13 FILE NO: 12-13-UP-SDP-VAR-PC
14
15 1. Approval is granted to allow construction of a new mixed use project and associated site
16 improvements as shown on the plans date stamped October 26, 2012 and as described in the
17 project description submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department and date
18 stamped August 8, 2012
19
20 2. In order to make the parking area more functional, a maximum of five (5) of the required twelve
21 (12) parking spaces may be compact. Where feasible, the width and length of these spaces shall
22 be more than 8-feet wide and 16-feet deep.
23
24 3. The parking plan for the Project shall be revised to comply with the following and is subject to
25 staff review and approval:
26
27 A. All carport parking spaces shall be standard spaces (9-feet wide by 19-feet deep)
28 B. All open parking end stalls shall be standard spaces (9-feet wide by 19-feet deep)
29 C. Compact spaces are any spaces that do not comply with the dimensions for standard
30 spaces and are a minimum of 8-feet wide by 16-feet deep.
31 D. The required accessible parking stall may be located in the open parking area or in the
32 carports.
33 E. The bike parking spaces and the planter areas may be relocated.
34
35 4. The landscaping plan shall be revised to reflect any changes that result from the modifications to
36 the parking plan. The revised landscaping plan is subject to staff review and approval and shall
37 be in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan approved by Planning Commission and
38 shall include the following:
39
40 A. Trees a minimum size of#15.
41 B. Shrubs a minimum size of 5 gallons.
42 C. Irrigation plan.
43 D. Demonstration of compliance with zoning ordinance landscaping requirements.
44
45 5. The Management Plan for the Project shall be revised to include, but is not limited to, the
46 following items and is subject to staff review and approval:
47
48 A. Indicate that the Project includes an onsite manager. The manager may occupy an SRO
49 unit or one-bedroom unit.
50 B. Identify the responsibilities of the onsite manager, such as daily operations of the facility,
51 enforcement of lease and management plan requirements, etc.
52 C. Assignment of vehicle and bike parking, storage lockers, and trash receptacles.
53 D. Identification of maintenance and safety procedures for the Project, such as frequency
54 and timing of maintenance, party(s) responsible for maintenance and security.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 12
1 E. Trash collection responsibilities, frequency, and type (toters, bins, dumpsters, etc.).
2 F. Use of the indoor and outdoor common area and laundry facilities.
3 G. Maintenance of Project facilities (landscaping, common area, laundry, refuse areas,
4 parking areas, etc.).
5 H. Use of private outdoor spaces (balconies, decks, etc.)and how they will be kept clean
6 and not used for storage.
7
8 6. In order to separate the Project from the adjacent properties to the north and south and to restrict
9 vehicular and/or pedestrian access to these sites, fencing shall be installed that prevents access
10 to these sites from the parking area and a fencing plan shall be provided. Fencing shall comply
11 with zoning ordinance requirements for location and height.
12
13 7. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff review and
14 approval:
15
16 A. Revised parking plan required by condition of approval #3.
17 B. Revised landscaping plan as required by condition of approval #4.
18 C. Final lighting plan that demonstrates compliance with Ukiah City Code requirements for
19 on-site lighting and is International Dark Sky Association approved or equivalent.
20 D. Landscaping and irrigation plans that demonstrate compliance with the State's Water
21 Efficiency Ordinance and California Green Building Code Requirements.
22 E. Revised Management Plan required by condition#5.
23 F. Details and manufactures specifications for bike racks. Inverted "U"style racks are
24 preferred.
25 G. Details that include materials and design of proposed raised garden beds and outside
26 seating, and trellis.
27 H. Fencing plan required by condition #6 that includes the location, height, design, and
28 materials for the fencing.
29
30 8. The Project shall include a resident onsite manager who shall reside in either a one-bedroom or
31 SRO unit.
32
33 9. All signs shall be designed to be compatible with the architecture style of the buildings. Signs
34 require application for and approval of a Sign Permit from the Planning and Community
35 Development Department.
36
37 10. Construction hours 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00
38 p.m. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and holidays recognized by the City of Ukiah.
39 Interior construction is exempt from these hours provided that construction noise is not audible at
40 the project property lines.
41
42 11. On plans submitted for building permit these conditions of approval shall be included as notes on
43 the first sheet.
44
45 From the Planninq Commission
46
47 12. To prevent access to the parcels to the north and south and to prevent vehicles from potentially
48 backing into buildings, a two-foot wall shall be installed on the north and south boundaries of the
49 parking lot. The material for the wall shall be block, concrete or similar material that will withstand
50 a vehicle backing into the wall. A four-foot fence shall be installed on the top of the wall for a total
51 maximum fence and wall height of 6-feet. Cyclone fencing is prohibited. The location, materials,
52 and details for the wall shall be shown on plans submitted for building permit and are subject to
53 staff review and approval.
54
55 13. If the Project includes a rainwater catchment system, the system shall be shown on building
56 permit plans and shall include a Vector Control Plan and Maintenance Plan. The rainwater
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 13
1 catchment system, Vector Control Plan, and Maintenance Plan are subject to review and
2 approval by the Public Works Department.
3
4 14. In order to ensure that parking is available for residents of the Project and to prevent parking of
5 residents, business owners, and their clients/customers on adjacent properties, informational
6 signage shall be installed in the parking lot that notifies drivers of the parking hours for the
7 commercial businesses on the site and that parking on adjacent properties is prohibited. Plans
8 submitted for building permit shall include the location, size, and content of the signage and is
9 subject to staff review and approval.
10
11 15. In order to ensure the planting of an appropriate street tree given the constraints of the location
12 (overhead wires and confined root spaces), the street tree species shall be eastern redbud,
13 Washington Hawthorne, or purple leaf plum. The species shall be identified on the plans
14 submitted for building permit and is subject to staff review and approval.
15
16 16. The Management Plan required in condition #5 and approved by staff shall be provided to all
17 tenants as part of the lease agreement, and tenants shall agree to compliance with applicable
18 requirements of the Management Plan as part of the lease agreement.
19
20 From the Public Works Department:
21
22 17. Prior to construction of site improvements, a final grading and drainage plan, and an erosion and
23 sediment control plan, prepared by a Civil Engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval
24 by the Department of Public Works. All sidewalk and ramps shall meet ADA requirements A final
25 drainage report shall be provided to support the design of the proposed drainage system.
26
27 18. Traffic signals and related improvements at the intersection of Norton Street and North State
28 Street shall be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the traffic study by W-
29 Trans dated July 11, 2012, and pursuant to traffic signal plans approved by the Department of
30 Public Works, including all work as necessary to restore signal operation to the satisfaction of the
31 City Engineer. At the time of traffic signal plan preparation the final design shall be coordinated
32 with the Public Works Department to ensure compatibility with the future downtown plan.
33
34 19. Any existing curb, gutter and sidewalk in disrepair that is adjacent to the subject property shall be
35 repaired. All work shall be done in conformance with the City of Ukiah Standard Drawings 101
36 and 102 or as directed by the City Engineer.
37
38 20. Each structure shall be separately connected to the sewer main, unless this requirement is
39 waived by the City Engineer. Existing sewer laterals planned to be utilized as part of this project
40 shall be cleaned and tested in accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 1105 and replaced if
41 required. If an existing lateral is to be abandoned, it shall be abandoned at the main to the
42 satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
43
44 21. Site run-off over the public sidewalk should be avoided. Under-sidewalk drains (Standard
45 Drawing 410) may be used where necessary.
46
47 22. Storm drain inlet filters shall be installed and maintained in all on-site storm drain inlets within
48 paved areas.
49
50 23. All work within the public right-of-way shall be perFormed by a licensed and properly insured
51 contractor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within this area or
52 otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3% of estimated
53 construction costs.
54
55 24. Public sidewalk improvements outside of the street right-of-way will require a sidewalk easement
56 dedicated to the City.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 14
1
2 25. Existing sewer laterals planned to be utilized as part of this project shall be cleaned and tested in
3 accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 1105, and repaired or replaced if required. If an
4 existing lateral is to be abandoned, it shall be abandoned at the main to the satisfaction of the
5 Public Works Department.
6
7 26. Any net increase in plumbing drainage fixture units will require payment of sewer connection fees
8 at the time of building permit issuance.
9
10 27. If required, there is a cost for City crews to construct new water main taps for water services.
11
12 28. Capital improvement fees for water services are based on the water meter size. A fee schedule
13 for water meter sizes is available upon request.
14
15 29. All irrigation and fire services shall have approved backflow devices.
16
17 From the Buildinq Official
18
19 30. Fire Sprinklers and monitored alarm systems are required for the residential and commercial
20 occupancies.
21
22 31. The project must comply with the requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code.
23
24 32. The project must comply with the accessibility requirements contained in Chapter 11 and 11 B of
25 the 2010 California Building Code (both residential and commercial occupancies).
26
27 33. Structure less than ten feet from the property line are required to have a fire wall parallel to the
28 property line and may require a parapet.
29
30 34. Detectable warning stripes are required at each end of the accessible route where it enters the
31 parking lot.
32
33 From the Fire Marshall
34
35 35. Comments such as location of street numbers, door&exit signs, fire extinguishers, fire lanes &
36 no parking areas, electrical shut off access, secure lock box, fire alarms, smoke detectors and
37 other routine requirements will be annotated when construction plans are reviewed for a permit.
38 Locations shown are for concept only. Actual locations will be field identified by the Fire
39 Prevention Bureau.
40
41 36. If there is any hot work, cutting, or use of torches or heating devices, the following code sections
42 will be adhered too, in their entirety: Hot work is defined as: Operations including cutting,
43 welding, Thermite welding, brazing, soldering, grinding, thermal spraying, thawing pipe,
44 installation of torch-applied roof systems or any other similar activity. (CFC 2602.1) If any of these
45 or similar operations will be conducted, Section 2604 FIRE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS shall be
46 followed, including hot work permits, inspections, and fire watches.
47
48 37. Additional fire protection svstems. (CFC 901.4.3) In occupancies of a hazardous nature, where
49 special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazards of the occupancy, or where the fire code
50 official determines that access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult, the fire code official shall have
51 the authority to require additional safeguards. Such safeguards include, but shall not be limited to,
52 the following:automatic fire detection systems, fire alarm systems, automatic fire-extinguishing
53 systems, standpipe systems, or portable or fixed extinguishers. Sprinklers throughout all of these
54 buildings will be required as well as a standpipe system within the western parking area.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 15
1 38. Emergency access key security boxes are required in buildings with fire sprinkler or fire alarm
2 systems. (CFC 506.1)
3
4 Standard Conditions
5
6 39. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
7 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
8 and issued/finaled.
9
10 40. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
11 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
12
13 41. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law,
14 regulation, specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal
15 agencies as applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing,
16 occupancy, and structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building
17 Permit is approved and issued.
18
19 42. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any future
20 purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
21
22 43. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
23 to building permit final.
24
25 44. This Use Permit and Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation
26 process if the approved project related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with
27 these stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years
28 of the effective date of this approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted
29 has ceased or has been suspended for 24 consecutive months.
30
31 45. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Use Permit and Site Development Permit shall be
32 granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the Site Development Permit
33 and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements
34 except to such specific purposes.
35
36 46. All required landscaping shall be properly maintained to insure the long-term health and vitality of
37 the plants, shrubs and trees. Proper maintenance means, but is not limited to the following:
38
39 A. Regular slow, deep watering when feasible. The amount of water used shall fluctuate
40 according to the season, i. e., more water in summer, less in the winter.
41 B. Additional watering shall occur during long periods of severe heat and drying winds, and
42 reduced watering shall be used during extended periods of cool rainy weather.
43 C. Fertilizer shall only being used on trees during planting. Shrubs may receive periodic fertilizer
44 according to the recommendations of a landscaping professional.
45 D. Weed killers shall not be used on or near trees.
46 E. The tree ties and stakes shall be checked every six months to ensure they do not constrict
47 the trunks and damage the trees.
48 F. Tree ties and stakes shall be removed after 1 to 3 years to ensure they do not damage the
49 trunk of the tree and its overall growth.
50 G. Any tree that dies or is unhealthy due to pests, disease or other factors, including vandalism,
51 shall be replaced with the same or similar tree species, or an alternative species approved by
52 the department of Planning and Community Development.
53 H. All trees shall be properly pruned as appropriate. No topping cuts shall be made. All pruning
54 shall follow standard industry methods and techniques to ensure the health and vitality of the
55 tree.
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 16
1 Failure to comply with the requirements listed above could result in revocation of the Use
2 Permit/Site Development Permit.
3
4 47. The project shall comply with the following requirements to reduce air quality impacts related to
5 project construction:
6
7 A. All grading shall comply with Mendocino County Air Quality Management District Rule 1-430,
8 Fugitive Dust Emissions.
9 B. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and
10 building construction institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust,
11 particularly during windy days.
12 C. All inactive soil piles on the project site shall be completely covered at all times to control
13 fugitive dust.
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 E. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers, and bulldozers shall
18 be used for earth moving operations.
19 F. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous
20 gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour.
21 G. Adjacent roadways exposed to dust, dirt, or other soil particles by vehicles tires, poorly
22 covered truck loads, or other construction activities shall be cleaned each day prior to the end
23 of construction activities using methods approved by the Director of Public Works/City
24 Engineer.
25
26 48. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
27 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
28 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
29 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
30 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
31 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
32 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
33 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
34 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
35 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
36 remain in full force and effect.
37
38 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
39 The Commission set aside some additional tentative meeting dates for December. However, no Projects
40 are ready for hearing, so there will be no other December meetings.
41
42 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
43 Commissioner Sanders: Recently attended a City Council workshop relative about Ukiah General Plan
44 interpretation related to economic development. While no changes to the General Plan were being
45 considered, she found the discussion informative. Additionally, she finds it disheartening about the
46 question being raised whether or not a Ukiah Planning Commission is necessary, particularly with the
47 large amount of work/effort that is taken on the part of each Commissioner to consider and approve
48 projects.
49
50 Commissioner Whetzel: Asked if the Planning Commission can make requests of City Council.
51 Specifically, with regard to the new City electrical substation project on E. Gobbi Street and Orchard
52 Avenue would like to request the landscaping that has been approved be reduced to include a less costly
53 landscaping plan. It may be the money saved could assist with the City softball facility that was recently
54 flooded or for some other project.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 17
1 Staff: The landscaping plan was required as mitigation measures for aesthetics. Changing the
2 landscaping could affect the environmental review completed for the project.
3
4 Chair Pruden: As with the City Substation project or even the new decorative lighting project in the
5 Downtown, funding is typically segregated and earmarked for specific projects so no matter how money
6 may be needed for something else. The substation is being paid for by funds from the Electric
7 Department and cannot be spent on things that are not part of that project.
8
9 Thanked staff for the Christmas cookies.
10
11 12. ADJOURNMENT
12 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:17 p.m.
13
14
15 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
16
17
18
19
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION December 12, 2012
Page 18