HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_08102011 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 August 10, 2011
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair None
7 Jason Brenner
8 Linda Helland
9 Linda Sanders
10 Mike Whetzel
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Charley Stump, Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
14 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
15 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
16 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
17
18 1. CALL TO ORDER
19 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by
20 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
21 Ukiah, California.
22
23 2. ROLL CALL
24
25 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
26
27 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The July 13, 2011 meeting minutes are included for review and
28 approval. The minutes from the July 27, 2011 meeting will be available for review and approval at the
29 August 24, 2011 meeting.
30
31 The following corrections were made to the July 13, 2011 minutes:
32 Page 1, line 41, change storages to shortages.
33 Page 5, lines 11-13, change sentence to read, `There may be a very good reason shy the landscaping
34 approved for the Skateboard Park had to be changed, but it would be helpful to provide feedback as to
35 why projects change.'
36
37 M/S Sanders/Helland to approve July 13, 2011 minutes, as amended. Motion carried (5-0).
38
39 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS—None.
40
41 6. APPEAL PROCESS— N/A
42
43 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - N/A
44
45 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE— N/A
46
47 9. PUBLIC HEARING
48 9A. Redevelopment Agency Plan Amendment — Eminent Domain. Conduct a public hearing on
49 the proposed redevelopment agency plan amendment to restore eminent domain for a portion of
50 the Redevelopment Plan Area and the associated CEQA document and make a possible
51 recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency. Staff is requesting this item be continued to a
52 date certain of August 24, 2011.
53
54 It was the consensus of the Commission to continue Redevelopment Agency Plan Amendment— Eminent
55 Domain to a date certain of August 24, 2011.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 1
1 9B. Walmart Expansion Draft Environmental Impact Report File Nos: 09-42 EIR-PC/09-28-SDP-
2 PC. Conduct a public hearing and take public and Commission comment on the Walmart
3 Expansion Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The project proposes a 47,621 foot
4 expansion of the existing 109,030 square foot store, for a total square footage of 156,651 to
5 include expanded general merchandise floor area and expanded grocery sales floor area, indoor
6 and outdoor garden centers, as well as the possibility of distilled alcohol sales, and a medical
7 clinic and/or vision center on the 13.44 acre site located at 1155 Airport Park Boulevard, APN
8 180-070-38, in the Airport Industrial Park. Also included as part of the project is a change in store
9 hours to 24 hours per day, seven days per week, modifications to the design of the exterior of the
10 building, the addition of new parking spaces, modifications to the landscaping, and other
11 associated site improvements. The expansion of the store requires approval of a Major Site
12 Development Permit.
13
14 Chair Pruden:
15 • The purpose of tonight's Planning Commission meeting is to receive public and Planning
16 Commission comments on the adequacy of the analysis presented in the DEIR.
17 • There is a 45-day comment period on the DEIR which runs from July 5, 2011 through August 18,
18 2011 at 5:00 p.m., so it is relevant for the public to submit their comments as soon as possible.
19 • In terms of format for tonight's meeting, recommends review of the DEIR chapter by chapter.
20
21 Planning Director Stump:
22 • The intent of tonighYs meeting is to discuss the information in the DEIR and determine whether or
23 not the document meets California Environmental Quality Act requirements for adequacy of the
24 analysis and not whether the project should be approved or not.
25 • Introduced Brian Grattidge of Environmental Science Associates (ESA), the City's EIR, who will
26 give a Powerpoint presentation about the DEIR and to answer questions.
27
28 Senior Planner Jordan
29 • Noted public comment cards and a sign-up sheet to receive email/hard copy notices related to
30 the Walmart project are available in the Council Chambers lobby.
31 • The DEIR and DEIR appendices are on the City's website, in the Planning Department, and at
32 the library.
33 • Introduced Brian Grattidge of ESA.
34
35 Brian Grattidge, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), the City's EIR consultant, addressed the
36 adequacy of the analysis for the DEIR and provided an overview of the EIR process, discussed the steps
37 completed to date as part of the process for the Walmart EIR, as well as identified the next steps in the
38 process with regard to the following relevant topics:
39
40 Backqround
41 • Application submitted for expansion of existing store in 2009
42 • Notice of Preparation— March 11, 2010
43 • Scoping Meeting held March 18, 2010
44 • Scoping Report to Commission presented June 9, 2010
45 • Draft EIR published July 5, 2011
46 • Review Period ends August 18, 2011
47 The proposed project:
48 • Expansion and alteration of the existing 109,030 sf Walmart store.
49 • The EIR analyzes a maximum project of 161,350 sf(current proposed plan is 156651 sf)
50 • Project components include:
51 - 24-hour operation from current 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.
52 - Expansion of the grocery and general merchandise sales
53 - Additional ancillary area (including tenant space)
54 - Update o the building exterior and signage
55 - Inclusion of energy saving features
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 2
1 - Expansion of the parking lot from 567 to 612 spaces
2 - Landscaping modifications: shade tree replacement, new tree planters, less turf
3 - Potential inclusion of a vision care center and/or limited-service medical clinic
4 - Potential distilled spirit sales
5 - Eliminates Tire Lube Express
6
7 Scope of the EIR:
8 • Aesthetics
9 • Air Quality
10 • Urban Decay
11 • Geology&Soils
12 • Hazards and Hazardous Materials
13 • Hydrology&Water Quality
14 • Land Use
15 • Noise
16 • Public Services & Utilities
17 • Transportation &Traffic
18 • Global Climate Change
19 • Biological Resources
20
21 Potentially Siqnificant Impacts:
22 • Geology and Soils
23 • Hazards and Hazardous Materials
24 • Hydrology and Water Quality
25 • Noise
26 • Traffic
27 • Biological Resources
28
29 Less than Siqnificant Impacts:
30 • Urban Decay
31 • Global Climate Change
32
33 Proiect Alternatives:
34 • No project
35 • Reduced Project Size Alternative
36 • No Footprint Expansion Alternative
37 • Other alternatives considered: Two story alternative, alternative location
38
39 Next Steps:
40 • DEIR review period closes August 8, 2011 at 5:00 p.m.
41 • Comments evaluated and written responses prepared
42 • Final EIR prepared prior to project hearing
43
44 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OPENED: 7:44 p.m.
45
46 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
47 No comments.
48
49 CHAPTER 2: SUMMARY
50
51 Steve Scalmanini:
52 Page 2-13, Questioned 'Impact 4.9-9: The Project would not make a cumulatively considerable
53 contribution to public services and utilities impacts associated with cumulative development in the Project
54 vicinity.' What does this mean?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 3
1 Chair Pruden: Stated Chapter 2 is a summary of impacts and mitigation measures and asked if impact
2 4.9-9 can be flagged for later discussion within the context in the chapter associated with this impact.
3
4 Commissioner Helland:
5 • Page 2-4, Mitigation Measure 4.1-2: How do LEED Goals and Green Globes lighting criteria
6 compare with International Dark Sky Association (ISA)? The City typically uses ISA as the
7 standard.
8 • Page 2-4, Impact 4.2-1: Under 'mitigations,' in addition to `none required,' clarify that the
9 Mendocino County Air Quality Management District has rule F-430 with which the project must
10 comply that will further reduce fugitive dust emissions.
11 • Page 2-9, Impact 4.6-1, somehow clarify that there would be a less than significant impact and no
12 mitigations would be required after complying with required permits, plans and regulations.
13 • Page 2-13, Mitigation Measure 4.10-2: Options A & B: Where are they described (reference to
14 page or section)? Also states, `The improvement planned by the City of Ukiah at Talmage
15 Road/Airport Park Boulevard described in Future Transportation Improvements, above' would
16 need to be implemented in addition to Mitigation Measure 4.10-2, but there is no such description
17 above.
18 • Page 2-14, Mitigation Measure 4.10-3c: Can right-of-way be taken from the sidewalk and
19 landscaped area for a Class II bike lane? Or, can the Right-of-way along Airport Park Boulevard
20 between Talmage Road and Commerce be used to install a Class I shared-use path by widening
21 the existing sidewalks? Or, can property owners be asked to deed sufficient right-of-way to put
22 Class II bike lane on street? Applicant will put in new sidewalks on Airport Park Boulevard and
23 Commerce Drive anyway.
24
25 CHAPTER 3: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
26
27 Chair Pruden: Requested clarification regarding the expansion of the parking lot from 567 to 612 spaces
28 provided for in the Powerpoint document and noted section 3.1 of DEIR document uses a different
29 number of 584 to 640 spaces.
30
31 Brian Grattidge: The difference is up to 28 of those spaces will be occupied by the cart corrals or other
32 things. 567 usable spaces have been identified. The rest have been taken out by cart corrals or other
33 things. 584 spaces is the number of spaces the site has, but usable number of spaces is the 567.
34
35 Chair Pruden: Have the parking spaces been accounted for that are blocked out for the garden
36 department with fertilizers, potting soil etc., that are existing behind the chain link fence on the south end
37 of the parking lot? The correct number of spaces and number of spaces available need to be clarified.
38
39 Commissioner Whetzel: Section 3.2.1 — In 1995 the City certified a Program EIR for the buildout of the
40 remaining Redwood Business Park area. The City adopted a Capital Improvement Program (Traffic
41 Impact Fee) in 1997 to pay for street and intersection improvements that would be needed as buildout
42 occurred. The program was updated in 1999. Is the program still active?
43
44 Planning Director Stump: The City has been collecting money ever since the Traffic Improvement
45 Program began.
46
47 Commissioner Sanders: How much is in the account?
48
49 Planning Director Stump: Does not have this figure available tonight, but can obtain the information.
50
51 Commissioner Helland: Page 3-3, section 3.2.1 Project Background, What does the CIP (traffic impact
52 fee) pay for? Could it contribute to adding Class II bike lane on Airport Park Boulevard? Or, creating
53 Class I with signage having shared use trail in sidewalk right-of-way?
54
55 Planning Director Stump:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 4
1 • When the Traffic Improvement Program began, specific projects had to be identified for which the
2 money would be spent. Some of these projects have been completed while others have not.
3 • The money continues to accumulate.
4 • If the Walmart expansion is approved, the City may choose to amend the CIP to incorporate
5 additional improvements.
6
7 Chair Pruden: Did the CIP (traffic impact fee) originate as a result of the adopted Airport Industrial
8 Planned Development Ordinance (AIP-PD) or when the existing Walmart store was approved by the City?
9
10 Planning Director Stump: The Program came as a result of the 1995 Program EIR for the buildout of the
11 remaining Redwood Business Park.
12
13 Chair Pruden: Would projects that were already developed in the AIP-PD prior to the creation of 1995
14 Program EIR have to pay more?
15
16 Planning Director Stump: All development since adoption of the ordinance establishing the Program
17 has paid a fee to help pay for traffic impacts resulting from the development. Projects developed prior to
18 adoption were not subject to the fee.
19
20 Commissioner Whetzel: Page 3-2, Figure 3-1, map is inaccurate. Betty Street now extends through and
21 intersects with Talmage Road. This was changed when the original Walmart store was approved in 1992.
22
23 Chair Pruden: There have been name changes to some of the streets in this area.
24
25 Don Flager:
26 • Is retired from Caltrans. Has consideration been given for other alternative off-ramp
27 improvements going south to help alleviate traffic congestion in the area of Talmage Road and
28 Airport Park Boulevard?
29 • An entirely new interchange would be required for an off-ramp going north.
30
31 Chair Pruden: The EIR document does talk about a ramp in the southerly direction basically where Jack-
32 in-the-Box is located behind Walmart as a possible route change.
33
34 Virginia Renolds: It is her understanding funds can be taken out of existing projects pending
35 street/intersection improvements for the Walmart project or is Walmart required to pay additional money
36 in this regard?
37
38 Chair Pruden: Staff has indicated the CIP is not fully funded.
39
40 Planning Director Stump:
41 • If this project is approved, Walmart will be required to pay their fair share of improvements
42 needed for new traffic impacts their project would cause.
43 • No funding from projects from around the City earmarked for traffic or streets would be used for
44 the Walmart project.
45
46 Virginia Renolds: Who decides on the fair share of traffic impact fees Walmart must pay?
47
48 Planning Director Stump: The Ukiah City Council decides the amount of traffic impact fees Walmart
49 must pay for the expansion project.
50
51 Don Larsen: Questioned why Orchard Avenue cannot be a straight shot to Airport Park Boulevard as
52 opposed to having to go through neighborhoods as this will impact them to get to Walmart.
53
54 Commissioner Whetzel: This is likely a discussion for the traffic section.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 5
1 Commissioner Helland: Page 3-5, Project Objectives: Bullet 7, `Develop a state-of-the-art retail facility
2 that serves local residents and visitors with essential goods and services in a safe and secure 24-hour,
3 seven days a week, shopping environment' and Bullet 8, "Improve the building sustainability through
4 implementing more efficient energy management practices, designs and equipment,' would entail
5 compliance with the AIP-PD guidelines of providing at least 20% of the site area in landscaping or it will
6 not be consistent with zoning ordinance relative to Bullet 10, that states `Design a project that is
7 consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.'
8
9 Chair Pruden: Page 3-3, Surrounding Land Uses, information is not entirely accurate or is incomplete.
10 There is no mention of Savings Bank of Mendocino County, the mini-mart across the street from the bank
11 or car wash. The description is very general.
12
13 Mary Anne Miller: Page 3-5, section 3.3 Description of the Project and 3.3.1 Project Objective: These
14 are very important because CEQA requires most of the project objectives be satisfied in the final decision
15 on the project. The objectives are 'very nice' and are everyone's objectives. The project objectives can be
16 met with the proposed project alternatives as well.
17
18 Steve Scalmanini: Page 3-5, section 3.3 Description of the Project and 3.3.1 Project Objectives: Bullet
19 1: Provide a commercial development that results in a net fiscal benefit to the City by providing new sales
20 tax revenue and increasing property tax revenues.What about the County?
21
22 Chair Pruden: Possibly add language that tax revenue sharing is an important component in our
23 community.
24
25 Steve Scalmanini:
26 • While the proposed project can result in a net fiscal benefit to the City, what about the potential
27 fiscal debt to the County by having to pay the medical costs of employees who do not have health
28 insurance.
29 • Bullet 2: Provide a commercial development that can be adequately be served by existing public
30 services and utilities. Is to assume that additional public services will be required? It is his
31 understanding that additional public services are required for 24-hour Walmarts.
32
33 Chair Pruden: Is concerned about having Walmart open 24 hours and will comment about this issue
34 later.
35
36 Steve Scalmanini:
37 • The project objective talks about a commercial development that can adequately be served by
38 existing public service, but what about the possible need for future public service and whether or
39 not this is possible.
40 • Bullet 3: Provide commercial development that creates new jobs for City residents. What about
41 other residents or persons residing outside of the County such as in Willits? Objective talks about
42 `new jobs' what about `net new jobs?' Is not sure if the net number of jobs will be positive or
43 negative and this information should be reflected in the EIR. How will new jobs for City residents
44 be measured and will this be a part of the mitigation monitoring plan? Need the number of full
45 time equivalent jobs.
46 • Bullet 5: Expand and provide new retail options in close proximity to local consumers by providing
47 daytime and night-time shopping opportunities in a safe and secure environment. Define `close
48 proximity' and does this mean surrounding neighborhoods in the vicinity of the site. There is a
49 neighborhood located to the north of the project site.
50 • Bullet 6: Enhance the commercial retail offerings in the City of Ukiah. How will this be measured?
51
52 • Bullet 8: Improve the building sustainability through implementing more efficient energy
53 management practices, designs and equipment. Does this objective apply only to new
54 construction or to the existing building?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 6
1 • Bullet 11: Provide sufficient off-street parking to minimize impacts to the surrounding residential
2 neighborhood, and ensure that adequate on-site parking is provided for store customers and
3 employees. Is not aware this is an issue. Believes there is a sign on Airport Park Boulevard that
4 prevents traffic from entering the surrounding residential neighborhood.
5
6 Alan Nicholson:
7 • Regarding jobs, the assumption that Walmart creates jobs does not add up. It is documented in
8 many studies nationwide that for every less than living wage Walmart adds, we lose 1.8 living
9 wage jobs. Replacing living wage jobs with low-wage jobs is an excellent way to continue
10 sluggish economic growth locally. The project objective talks about the creation of new jobs for
11 the Walmart expansion and is of the opinion the EIR does not reflect adequately studying the
12 impacts of this job creation.
13 • The tax revenue for groceries and related items is not going to offset the decline in other
14 groceries and the decline in living wage jobs in the community. If the project closes some
15 significant anchor grocery stores in the community, this will impact lesser stores creating a
16 domino effect. The Walmart expansion will clearly be a net loss to Ukiah and certainly not
17 representative of any kind of net gain like that reflected in the EIR. Rather than bring stability, this
18 project will have very long term destabilizing consequences.
19
20 Chair Pruden: The Tire and Lube Express will close. The question is what will happen to these
21 employees. Will these employees be offered a job in another department.
22
23 Commissioner Helland:
24 • Page 3-11, #6, Food Displays: typographical error, should read, `the building will include a film on
25 the freezer doors that combats condensation and requires no energy, unlike heating systems that
26 are typically used to combat condensation.
27 • Page 3-13, Landscaping Modifications, provide for ADA compliant facilities. Narrative does not
28 talk about ADA compliant facilities in parking areas.
29
30 Gene Hoggren:
31 • Has traveled extensively in the US and usually stays overnight in Walmart parking lots.
32 • There are many 24-hour Walmart stores around the country and has observed that many small
33 retail establishments are lost as a result.
34 • Walmart is in financial position to lower or raise prices at-will until all their competition no longer
35 exists.
36 • His wife worked as a cashier in Walmart for 10 years and is familiar with their corporate policy.
37 Walmart can raise or lower the price of any item sold in the store. Smaller stores cannot compete
38 with Walmart.
39 • Unlike Safeway or Lucky, Walmart is non-union.
40 • Allowing for a 24-hour Walmart is a mistake because all of the small local convenience stores
41 should be allowed six or eight hours during the 24-hour period to do business.
42 • Allowing Walmart the advantage of operating 24 hours will bring about a big change to Ukiah.
43
44 Chair Pruden: Mr. Hoggren did not comment on the EIR, he provided information about Walmart.
45
46 Rex Cipher: Wondering what is wrong with competition?This is called capitalism.
47
48 Steve Scalmanini:
49 • Page 3-13, Lighting Modifications, `The lights in the parking lot will be modified to provide
50 adequate lighting levels. Questioned is existing lighting adequate in the first place?
51 • Page 3-15, Security Measures, 1. Conduct a risk analysis (crime survey) of the area to evaluate
52 the security needs for the store and implement a security plan based upon this analysis. Why is
53 this aspect not part of the EIR? 2. As appropriate based upon the crime survey, establish a
54 parking lot patrol that assists customers, ensures safety and takes action to identify and prevent
55 any suspicious activity (such as loitering and vandalism) both during the day and nighttime hours;
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 7
1 and a plain clothes patrol inside the store to ensure safety and security. What is the legal
2 definition of `appropriate.' Why does Walmart not have an existing parking lot patrol? 3. Install
3 closed-circuit camera systems (surveillance cameras) inside and outside the store. Why are
4 these not existing? 4. Establish a Risk Control Team, which is a team of associates responsible
5 for and trained to identify and correct safety and security issues at the site, including inside the
6 store. Why are these safety precautions measures not already existing? 5. Provide lighting in the
7 parking areas that will ensure public safety(See Lighting Modifications, above). If lighting ensures
8 public safety, we would not need a police department.
9
10 Commissioner Brenner: There appears not to be enough information in the project description. With the
11 questions raised above, it may be beneficial to give reference in the project description where these types
12 of questions can be addressed and this would facilitate reading of the EIR document.
13
14 Steve Scalmanini: Page 3-16, Hours of Operation Modifications, `The proposed change in square
15 footage and hours would add approximately 85 new positions.' It does not indicate how many of these
16 positions are full-time. Will these positions be minimal time?What is the number in full time equivalents?
17
18 Chair Pruden: More information is necessary in the EIR document about the 85 new positions and the
19 elimination of the Tire and Lube Express department.
20
21 Steve Scalmanini: Page 3-18, section 3.4 Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals, 'The
22 principal discretionary permits and approvals for the Project will be granted by the City of Ukiah.
23 Questioned, `will be granted' thought permits and approvals are being `considered' by the City. Is under
24 the impression the permits and approvals are not guaranteed by the City.
25
26 CHAPTER 4: SECTION 4.1 AESTHETICS
27
28 Chair Pruden:
29 • Section 4.1 discusses aesthetics which addresses the environmental setting and describes where
30 the project is located and what surrounds it. It mentions scenic roadways, scenic vistas known as
31 'viewsheds,' and light and glare.
32 • Page 4.1-5, Scenic Vistas, `The project site is located in a developed commercial and industrial
33 area of Ukiah. No scenic vistas are located within or adjacent to the Project site; however, in the
34 distance to the east and west, hills provide background to area views.' The wording of the
35 information is misleading. While the information is generally correct, disagrees that no scenic
36 vistas are located within the project site because the east and west hills can be seen from the site
37 and do offer an extraordinary 'viewshed.' Viewshed is the term Ukiah uses in documents in place
38 of scenic vistas. Disagrees with the reference of scenic vistas as used in the context for this
39 project because the `scenic vistas' do not occur on site but rather in the east and west hills.
40 Scenic Vistas are integral to how the project is developed.
41
42 • Section 4.2 discusses Air Quality with regard to physical setting, local setting to include an Air
43 Quality Data Summary table for the project area. This section also addresses regulatory Setting
44 and Application Air Quality Regulations with comparison to local rules, impacts/impact analysis
45 and mitigation measures
46
47 Joan Griswald: In her opinion, there will be a higher percentage of businesses being siphoned from as a
48 result of this new business.
49
50 Ike Heinz: From an aesthetic standpoint, is it possible instead of expanding the parking lot to have
51 parking underneath the building? In this way trees and landscaping would be maintained on the site as
52 well as have room to add more trees. There would be much less heat generated from the parking lot with
53 landscaping and less runoff from the pavemenUasphalt during the winter.
54
55 Carrie Hartman:
56 • Has a comment about every section of the EIR and will submit her comments in writing.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 8
1 • It would be helpful if the document were put on the Powerpoint screen to better understand the
2 discussions and stay on topic.
3
4 Steve Scalmanini: Page 4.1-10,Mitigation Measures, `The project applicant will be required to prepare a
5 photometric plan demonstrating that lighting will not spill over onto adjacent properties.' Why is the plan
6 not part of the EIR.
7
8 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.1-9, Impact 4.1-2, Mitigation Measure 4.1-2, 'Fixtures shall be full cut-
9 off and nighttime friendly, consistent with LEED goals and Green Globes criteria for light pollution
10 reduction.' The City tends to use International Dark Sky Association applications and would like the
11 criteria and how they differ from the International Dark Sky Association.
12
13 Commissioner Whetzel: Many of the questions raised by Mr. Scalmanini will be examined at the
14 permitting process.
15
16 Chair Pruden: Some of the questions/comments raised by Mr. Scalmanini require clarification in the EIR
17 document and some concerns will be answered along the process.
18
19 CHAPTER 4: SECTION 4.2 AIR QUALITY
20
21 Mira G.:
22 • Referred to Section 4.2.2, pages 4.2-2 that states, Mendocino County Air Quality Management
23 District (MCAQMD) maintains several monitoring stations in the Project vicinity that monitor air
24 quality and compliance with associated ambient standards. The closest station to the Project site
25 is the East Gobbi Street Monitoring Station approximately a half mile away. The pollutants
26 monitored at this station are ozone and carbon monoxide. The Ukiah County Library Monitoring
27 Station is located approximately 1 mile away was used to collect data for particulate matter less
28 than ten microns and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns. The most recent published data for
29 ozone and particulates at the East Gobbi State and Ukiah County Library Monitoring Stations are
30 presented in Table 4.2-1. Respirable particulate matter PM10 and PM2.5 that consist of
31 particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter and 2.5 microns or less in diameter are
32 not measured every day.
33 • Questioned the statistical data and methodology for collection of greenhouse gas inventory
34 (GHG) provided in the criteria Table 4.2-1 on page 4.2-2 concerning the measurement of ozone
35 particulates and carbon monoxide particulates and whether these greenhouse gas emissions are
36 adequately monitored because the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) inventory impacts are global. It
37 appears carbon monoxide is not well monitored. Data indicates an increase in ozone since 2007
38 to 2009. This is worrisome. Greenhouse gases should be monitored particularly with the claim
39 that these gases need to be reduced. The City needs to take measures to reduce these gases
40 and not adequately measuring them is not a good idea.
41 • Important to have the 2010 data as part of the table.
42 • It is important the purpose of the table and data are understood. The report does state the Project
43 will generate greenhouse gases that may have significant impacts on the environment or conflict
44 with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions so the
45 overall task is not how much we allow to happen, but the overall task is the need to reduce
46 greenhouse gases.
47
48 Chair Pruden: If there are no numbers in the table does this mean the local monitoring agency is not
49 monitoring that or they were not available for this report?
50
51 Brian Grattidge: That is correct. The stations at the County Library and Gobbi Street only monitor ozone
52 and carbon monoxide. Regarding the comment that carbon monoxide is not well monitored what was
53 done was to use statistical models to estimate the level of carbon monoxide. This is true in Ukiah,
54 California, the US and the world. Carbon monoxide is not monitored as closely as to what we call criteria
55 air pollutants which is what you see on Table 4.2-1. It is a good point in that greenhouse gases are
56 modeled in a manner similar to air quality and in some EIR's you will see that combined. More frequently
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 9
1 you will see GHG and climate change separated as a topic and it is just for purposes of discussion but it
2 is part of the emissions issue. In this case, the Table is basically the criteria pollutants. Then we also look
3 at toxic air contaminants (TACs) and potential health risks relating to those and separately look at
4 greenhouse gases, carbon monoxide and other GHGs that are there and calculate the CO2. Hopefully
5 this helps explain what to look for in the table.
6
7 Chair Pruden: In terms of modeling even if you do not have good figures locally does not mean this
8 invalidates the section so the best effort is made or does testing have to be done.
9
10 Brian Grattidge: There are different methodologies and as he understands it, the City and County
11 actually are embarking on a project that is called a GHG Inventory. This presents an interesting issue to
12 analyze within the confines of an EIR because we are looking at a local project and a local impact that is
13 basically analyzed at an air shed or even a state or national level but the area of impact that you are
14 looking at is basically global. So what occurs is to look at the current and future conditions of a project
15 and try to tie that to the state's goal for reduction that is basically spelled out in AB32. This occurs in the
16 absence of a Local Climate Action Plan so in the future if you have a project of this sort it comes back and
17 through these joint City/County efforts by way of a Local Climate Action Plan that provides for more
18 sources of information. So what we are doing in the EIR is providing the best available sources until
19 those future efforts are completed.
20
21 Commissioner Sanders: Requested a statement be made to this effect in the EIR in that the table is
22 inadequate to the issue of adequately monitoring greenhouse gases raised by the public member.
23
24 Brian Grattidge: Additional information can be added to this that the monitoring that is done basically by
25 the Air District is for a different purpose.
26
27 Commissioner Sanders: I think this is very important.
28
29 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.2-3 to 4.2-4, At bottom of each description of the Criteria Air Pollutants,
30 note whether the region is in attainment of state and federal standards as was done for SO2. Also
31 discuss why not in attainment and the implications of this for the project.
32
33 Public Member: The PM10 data should be found at the County library if this information is locally
34 monitored.
35
36 Chair Pruden: We will check on this information and see.
37
38 Commissioner Helland:
39 • Page 4.2-13, BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines which must be met, Items #2 and #3, read
40 'The Project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersection to more than 44,000
41 vehicles per hour(in #2) and to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour...(in #3). It does not say `by,
42 more than 44,000 vehicles per hour...This suggests that the analysis must take into account not
43 only the proposed increase in traffic volumes as done below on the same page, but must add
44 proposed increase to the existing volume to get the total. What is the existing traffic volume plus
45 the project traffic volume at affected intersections?
46
47 In Appendix C dealing with the Air Quality analysis I saw the URBEMIS reports, but I did not see
48 reports of the AERMOD model, nor the guidelines by California Office of Environmental Health
49 Hazards Assessment (OEHHA). Nor did I see 'additional information on the limitations and
50 conservative nature of the models and techniques within a Health Risk AssessmenY as stated in
51 footnote 6 on page 4.2-15.
52
53 CHAPTER 4: SECTION 4.3 URBAN DECAY
54 Chair Pruden:
55 • Section 4.3 discusses Urban Decay within the project market area taking into consideration the
56 retail market characterization, identifies major commercial areas in and near Ukiah, addresses
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 10
1 the regulatory setting, impacts/impact analysis and mitigation measures/methodology, study tasks
2 and resources, provides for a table that includes information concerning maximum sales impacts
3 from the proposed project in 2013, cumulative impacts and other relative data and information.
4
5 Joan Griswald: Page 4.3-15, asked about urban blight. If the total revenue for the new store is $20.4
6 million of which $12.2 million will be diverted/siphoned from existing food stores businesses what about
7 the remaining $9.2 million and what areas will this impact. Statistically speaking, the numbers
8 represented are not good for the community and will likely result in business closures and corresponding
9 urban blight that will occur from unoccupied buildings.
10
11 Chair Pruden: Asked if the concern is the statistics are too low and inadequately represent the true
12 impact.
13
14 Jeffrey Blankford:
15 • During the March scoping session last year for the Walmart expansion project urban decay was
16 of concern and appreciates this is covered in the EIR. Unfortunately, the information is out of
17 date.
18 • The Powerpoint presentation regarding Urban Decay indicates the 'Market is relatively strong.'
19 • Anyone paying attention to the American economy can understand that the data in the EIR is
20 based on older data because the economy has gone down tremendously all around the country
21 with business foreclosures/home foreclosures and so on.
22 • Finds a lot of problems with the analysis.
23 • The report mentions that Walmart's expected income will be $21.6 million of which $12.2 million
24 or more will come from existing businesses or markets. The report also suggests that four
25 markets, Food Max, Lucky's, Raley's and the Grocery Outlet will be impacted.
26 • The report states most of these stores appear to be performing well enough to adapt to the new
27 competition according to the sales performance by CBRE Consulting, 2010. Where is the data?
28 The data is insufficient.
29 • In particular Food Max may face the largest individual impact due to its proximity to the project
30 and its discount orientation but the store's existing sales volumes suggest it will be able to
31 compete effectively when the Walmart space opens.
32 • This reflects to me a total failure not only to understand the present economy which was not
33 included in the analysis, but the history of Walmart as a retailer across the country.
34 • Walmart can lower its prices to the point where Food Max, which is a discount store, will not be
35 able to compete and stay open.
36 • The idea as suggested in the report is in the Food Max shopping center and in Pear Tree Center
37 where Lucky's is located, which is the same owner by-the-way, that if these retail establishments
38 do go out of business and that is the way it goes it is likely these stores will not be re-tenanted
39 rather soon. The reality is in this current economic situation and with every economic expert
40 predicts the economy will get a lot worse, the likelihood that these stores would be re-tenanted is
41 not very great.
42 • Under the circumstances the EIR statement dealing with urban decay does not deal with
43 economic realty of the present situation.
44 • We also know that Walmart tends to pay less in wages and provides no health care benefits.
45 Whenever there are employees with these types of wages and lack of benefits adds to the
46 community to those who are laid off many of which might be homeowners would not likely be able
47 to pay their mortgages that results in home foreclosures.
48 • California is one of the leading states in home foreclosures.
49 • The overall impact of the Walmart project to gratify its `greed' to the detriment of the welfare and
50 the urban setting of this City is simply something the Planning Commission needs to consider in
51 overall decision to be made.
52 • This particular section needs to be re-done in order to use economic data that is relatively current
53 and not the data used to produce this report.
54
55 Raging Grannies of Ukiah commented on Urban Decay and perFormed a song entitled 'Walmart:'
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 11
1 'Last night I had the strangest dream about the Walmart store, I dreamed it grew beyond its walls and thru
2 the Food Max door. Then it turned the corner and went north on 101 when it got to the Lucky store those
3 union jobs were done. And soon we all will have fresh food shipped in from China's farms and all your
4 health and vision needs will be safe in WalmarYs arms. They'll be no need for Friedman's now or Oak
5 Valley Nursery the Walmart octopus will soon be competition free. The Walmart octopus is here to shut
6 down local shops if you have a problem now call the Walmart cops. Come buy your cradle and your
7 grave, a pig valve for your heart, there's just one store thaYs left in town the super galactic Walmart.'
8
9 • They find it offensive that this is a lesser environmental impact report.
10 • Concerned with the jobs lost to other retail establishments when all this income goes to Walmart.
11 The people working for Walmart cannot afford private health care because Walmart does not pay
12 health care benefits. We, the taxpayers, will pay for this when such employees have to go to the
13 emergency room. This is unacceptable and especially in this economy.
14 • Request the Commission consider this issue closely.
15
16 Gene Hoggren: Has witnessed all around the country that Walmart can at-will reduce hours to avoid
17 having to pay their employees for full-time work or to avoid paying health care costs. There is no union
18 representation for Walmart employees. This is Walmart's department policy and this company does this
19 sort of thing all over the country.
20
21 Chair Pruden: Is the definition of urban decay the physical deterioration of a particular piece of real
22 estate. Theoretically speaking, if a vacant building is maintained this is not considered urban decay and
23 constitutes just a vacant building.
24
25 Brian Grattidge: This is correct, it is just the physical deterioration.
26
27 Steve Scalmanini: Inquired about the mention in the document of having possible vision care and a
28 medical clinic in the Walmart store and while he did not see this in the document. Will this cover Walmart
29 employees?
30
31 Jeffery Blankford:
32 • With regard to re-tenanting, for at least seven or eight years there has been a very large vacant
33 commercial space behind the County Courthouse with no prospect for a new tenant. The idea
34 that a corner building not having a tenant after a long period time brings about the concern and
35 problem of what to do about vacant buildings that have gone out of business.
36 • Because of the introduction of Home Depot, the last of the hardware stores, Ukiah Valley Lumber,
37 went out of business. There appears to be no one interested in taking over this business.
38 • Having lived in San Francisco and seeing vacant buildings that after a while the business owners
39 no long care for become urban decay. The same can occur in Ukiah with vacant buildings for
40 businesses that are no longer operating and the concern these building will deteriorate and be
41 vandalized thus alluding to urban decay.
42 • In reality and in this economy, what is the likelihood vacant buildings will be re-tenanted.
43
44 Chair Pruden: Section 4.3.2, provides the boundaries of the market area that was determined to be just
45 north of Cloverdale. The figure is conservative and questioned the origin. It has been our experience that
46 Ukiah has a considerable market coming from Cloverdale to shop, but is not in possession of the zip code
47 information to say exactly how many people are coming from Cloverdale. The information provided by
48 CBRE Consulting, 2010 with regard to Cloverdale as a market area does not appear to be entirely
49 correct. Accordingly, to say 'just north of Cloverdale' does not seem accurate. The boundary likely
50 extends to Cloverdale rather than just north of it. While it may be cross-referenced in another place in the
51 document, recommends looking at this information. She did not find such information in the appendix
52 portion of the document. There is so much material in the document that she may have overlooked this
53 aspect.
54
55 Mira G.:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 12
1 • The $12.9 million income drawn from other businesses extends to other areas, including
2 Cloverdale. The draw area essentially continues until it reaches another Walmart market area.
3 Walmart stores are often more detrimental to communities that do not house/host one partly
4 because Walmart will draw a certain amount of traffic to a location. Walmart draws sales from
5 other businesses. For a County seat having a Walmart that draws sales from commercial retail
6 establishments in Ukiah and in other market areas that include Sonoma and Lake Counties is not
7 a good thing.
8 • Does not support milking communities dry of their resources for Walmart's gain.
9
10 Mary Anne Miller:
11 • Page 4.3-19, Cumulative impacts reference the year 2013 in the document which is the first full
12 year of operation for the expansion project. Questioned the cumulative impacts in 2013 and the
13 model being used for the transportation impacts, which has a future date of 2030. Please explain
14 why the use of a transportation model which was developed for the UVAP Study, which may be a
15 perfectly good model but how is this model useful for the year 2013 when the effects of the
16 transportation impacts would be apparent. We will see the effects of the transportation impacts in
17 2013 for the expansion project.
18 • Page 4.3-15, with regard to the proposed project impacts expected to divert $12.2 million from
19 other food stores within the market area and the remaining impacts among general
20 merchandise/apparel of $4.8 million and other retail of$3.4 million that would be lost in revenue
21 for a grand total of$20.4 million not$12.2 million.
22 • Continues to be amazed at the way marijuana sales are factored into people's income. Page 4.3-
23 14, recapture of existing sales leakage, states, `one potential source of demand for the expanded
24 Walmart is the share of local residents shopping currently occurs outside the market area.
25 Estimating the extent of any such current sales leakage is difficult for the market likely due to
26 under-reporting of residents' actual incomes. For example, an economic study prepared for
27 Mendocino County in 2007 indicates that area household income figures may be as much as 10
28 to 22 percent higher than demographic estimates due to marijuana cultivation, which is reportedly
29 common. The range translates into an approximate increase of between $6,000 and $12,800 in
30 annual per household income based on the market area average of$58,570 in 2009.'
31 A retail demand, sales attraction and spending leakage study prepared by CBRE Consulting
32 indicates that almost all retail categories attract sales (i.e. to generate spending in excess of the
33 assumed market area household demand). The analysis is based on area income estimates that
34 are likely to be lower than actual household incomes, which would lead to an under-estimate of
35 market area demand. A leakage study cannot be prepared because the extent of reported income
36 is not realistic due to the fact that reported income does not include marijuana profits.
37
38 Commissioner Whetzel: That study was prepared by the County.
39
40 Mary Anne Miller: County or no, it says household incomes may be higher than demographic estimates
41 by 10 to 22 percent due to unreported income from marijuana cultivation. This range translates into an
42 approximate increase of between $6,000 and $12,800 in annual per household income. Questions
43 whether these income figures are accurate.
44
45 Commissioner Whetzel The figures represent an average.
46
47 Chair Pruden: Mary Anne Miller is essentially questioning the facts. It may very well not be a fact, but
48 rather an estimate even though it is a County study.
49
50 Charley Vaughn:
51 • Pays his taxes and does not shop at Walmart.
52 • Addressed the issue of urban decay and this is one of biggest factors Walmart causes.
53 • In his opinion, Walmart is destroying the local economy and given the economy today is helping
54 to destroy our middle class.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 13
1 • Walmart is the largest retail employer in the nation and has the largest number of employees who
2 do not have health care benefits. They keep their employees 'under the line' so they will not get
3 their employee benefit package. This is how Walmart provides us with these wonderful low
4 prices. They claim to be helping the economy with these wonderful low prices. Walmart
5 encourages its employees to get food stamps and how to use some of the government services
6 that are available. This is about government subsidy for an operation like Walmart.
7 • We have to stop supporting these people. We have to stop inviting them into our community and
8 definitely do not allow them to expand.
9 • If Walmart were to pay a living wage to all of its employees and equal pay to woman, there would
10 not be the wonderful Walmart low prices and would not be expanding at the rate they are.
11 • We need to pay attention. We need to say`no.'
12
13 Chair Pruden:
14 • Page 4.3-7, 2"d paragraph, left out Staples and Lazy Boy.
15 • The report has one very small sentence about the Downtown.
16 • There are about three sentences about the Palace Hotel and she is not sure why.
17 • There is no mention that Ukiah is the County seat. One of the major businesses in the Downtown
18 is the Courthouse.
19 • There are no numbers about the number of businesses and/or employers in the Downtown.
20 • Less needs to be said about the Palace Hotel. It is empty. It is identified as a blighted area for
21 redevelopment.
22 • The Downtown is underwritten as it functions as a shopping node.
23
24 Commissioner Helland:
25 • According to page 4.3-9 of the EIR, `Where economic or social effects of a proposed project will
26 directly or indirectly lead to an adverse physical change in the environment, then CEQA requires
27 disclosure of the resulting physical impacts.' On the same page, urban decay is defined as
28 `physical deterioration that is so prevalent and substantial it impairs the proper utilization of
29 affected real estate, or the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding community.'
30
31 • The DEIR acknowledges the real possibility that Grocery Outlet and Lucky's supermarket in the
32 north end of Ukiah may go out of business. Losing access to groceries, particularly at Lucky's to
33 which many residents of nearby affordable housing complexes can walk, is a physical impact.
34 Studies show that on average, people who live in proximity to grocery stores consume more fruits
35 and vegetable which leads to better health. The possible adverse health effects on people of the
36 potential loss of Grocery Outlet and Lucky's supermarket make this physical change significant.
37 Please address it in the final EIR.
38
39 • Page 4.3-12 of the EIR states 'In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, a project's economic
40 impacts on a community are only considered significant if they lead to adverse physical change in
41 the environment.' The EIR fails to mention the role of social and economic factors in determining
42 the significance of environmental impacts.
43
44 • According to the CEQA Guidelines Article 5 Section 15064: Where a physical change is caused
45 by economic or social effects of a project, the physical change may be regarded as a significant
46 effect in the same manner as any other physical change resulting from the project. Alternatively,
47 economic and social effects of a physical change may be used to determine that the physical
48 change is a significant effect on the environment. If the physical change causes adverse
49 economic or social effects on people, those adverse effects may be used as a factor in
50 determining whether the physical change is significant. For example, if a project would cause
51 overcrowding of a public facility and the overcrowding causes and adverse effect on people, the
52 overcrowding would be regarded as a significant effect.
53
54 Chair Pruden: Page 4.3-13, table 4.3-3: Table indicates the indoor garden center has zero square
55 footage. In the spring and summer there is space used as a garden center and this same space will be
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 14
1 full of Christmas items, including Christmas Trees in the fall/winter. Requested clarification if this area is
2 not used year around is it not considered an indoor garden center? Apparently, areas that are changed
3 seasonally are viewed as a general retail area.
4
5 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.3-15, Table 4.3-5: It appears from the table that all or 100% of new
6 sales at the expanded Walmart are expected to be diverted from existing retailers. If so, please state.
7
8 Chair Pruden: Page 4.3-15, Will this Walmart have a deli component? There is no mention of
9 competition about other delis in the area. It is quite common in the super Walmarts to have a bakery
10 component. There is no mention of competition to our local bakeries of which we have several, anything
11 from donut shops to sophisticated pastry and baking products.
12
13 Bill Durham:
14 • Works and shops in Ukiah.
15 • Walmart pays really low wages.
16 • Not only being the largest retailer in the country, they are the retailer with the largest percentage
17 of employees on public assistance and this public assistance constitutes a public subsidy or
18 subsidy under wages. I believe this is despicable.
19
20 Chair Pruden: Should we be talking about wage structures or is this component not appropriate to be
21 talked about in the EIR.
22
23 Brian Grattidge: Wage structure and jobs in general within the context of an EIR are very narrow. So
24 the short answer is 'no.' The way jobs typically come into play in an EIR is looking at potential changes in
25 housing stock. For example, if you have a very large employer coming into an area, is there sufficient
26 housing stock to absorb those employees. In terms of the type or quality of the jobs or the benefits that
27 would be associated with the jobs or replacement of the jobs that may very well be an economic factor
28 related to the project that the Planning Commission considers, but it is not within the confines of an EIR.
29
30 Chair Pruden: Inquired about the 85 new employees anticipated and with an approximate 12%
31 unemployment rate is not going to get a net increase in housing stock, but simply going to get
32 unemployed people. Or again, we have to look at the statistics for people in the `auto end.' Does not
33 know how it works with the factoring in of the 85 new employees. This may be something we need to take
34 a look at.
35
36 Brian Grattidge:
37 • Page 4.2-15, Table 4.3-5, confirmed the total potential sales is $20.4 million. The focus on the
38 $12.2 was because the urban and decay analysis indicates that the grocery stores are the ones
39 that will take the biggest hit in terms of the existing store that will expand from about 700 sq.ft. of
40 groceries, which is less than 711s to basically a full service grocery. While Walmart does propose
41 to increase its overall square footage for general merchandise and other retail areas, it will lose
42 the Tire and Lube Express. This amounts to approximately two million in sales that is basically
43 dispersed in the community and essentially offsets the $20.4 million down to $18 million.
44 • On the topic of sales leakage and unreported income, those other sales general merchandise
45 ($4.8 million) and other retail stores ($3.4 million) also come out of the market area and is not
46 what is called leakage, which basically means people leaving to shop in some other locale. We
47 assume the dollars come from within the market area. We further assume and this is a
48 conservative assumption that there is sales leakage that we do not know about because it is in
49 the `underground' economy. The point is we are basically trying to be conservative by using
50 reported income statistics. There may be additional dollars that would tend to lessen the impact
51 that Walmart would have on the area, but we do not want to make those assumptions because
52 we are not completely confident with what those underground economy figures really are so we
53 are using tax reported income and trying to be fairly conservative with how we look at those
54 numbers. The point being we are not just talking about $12.2 million and we are talking about
55 additional conversions within the market area.
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 15
1 Steve Scalmanini:
2 • With regard to the topic of wages and overall wages to exclude information from the DEIR is
3 insufficient. I think a relationship can be drawn between less wages in the community, less overall
4 money to spend and additional urban decay. It is up to the EIR authors to figure it out. We know
5 we are stuck with less wages in the grocery business in this town and in the market area because
6 of this expansion if it happens.
7 • Less money to spend means less overall sales and more decay of existing infrastructure.
8 • Figure it out and put it in the EIR.
9 • Page 4.3-1, Urban Decay, `The analysis and findings in this section are based on the information
10 contained in the Walmart Expansion Economic Impact and Urban Decay Analysis prepared in
11 June 2010.' One speaker already commented that this information is outdated and since this was
12 written over a year ago why was this information kept secret? How was the particular agency that
13 wrote this information chosen? There is no information or reference to this process.
14 • Page 4.3-1, paragraph 5, sentence that reads, `The Court ruled that the cumulative impact
15 analysis for the proposed shopping centers should consider all other past, present or reasonably
16 foreseeable future retail projects with the projecYs market area.' Would like the definition of
17 `reasonably foreseeable' and how this is documented.
18 • Page 4.3-2, Section 4.3.2, Environmental Setting, Project Market Area, paragraph 1, sentence
19 that reads, `The market area definition is based on the principle that most consumers will travel to
20 the shopping destination most convenient to their homes.'Where does this principle come from?
21 Sounds like an assumption to me and would like to see this corrected.
22 • Page 4.3-2, Says Lakeport was considered but then with the presence of other general
23 merchandise stores over there it is unlikely residents will make frequent trips. Has not seen
24 anything in the EIR that the local Walmart is not going to advertise. Therefore in Lakeport please
25 include the commitment that somehow they agree Lakeport is out of the market area.
26 • Page 4.3-5: Retail Market Characterization, 'Analysis of California Board of Equalization (BOE)
27 data on taxable sales within Mendocino County and its cities, shows that the City of Ukiah is a
28 major retail hub for Mendocino County, drawing customers from nearby cities and unincorporated
29 areas, as well as tourists who travel to and through the area on Highway 101. According to CBRE
30 Consulting, the City of Ukiah accounted for an estimated 49 percent of the market area's sales in
31 2008. CBRE Consulting utilized data from the BOE to determine market value.' Does not see the
32 data in the document. This information may be in the Appendix and missed it. If the document
33 refers to the data, it should be there and is insufficient without it.
34 • Page 4.3-6, talks about major commercial areas in and near Ukiah within the market area there
35 are three major retailers and 10 grocery stores. Does not see that Hopland is included in the
36 information. There is a grocery store in Hopland and is pretty sure this store is locally owned by
37 someone who lives in Hopland.
38 • Page 4.3-7, paragraph 3, last sentence, `Each of these three stores had moderate shopper
39 volumes during CBRE Consulting's field research.' What is the definition of `moderate shopping
40 volumes?' Can we get some numbers on this please.
41 • Page 4.3-8, paragraph 2, last sentence, `A few sources indicated that a sale of this site had either
42 been completed or was in process;' Can we get more specific about the sources here. Did not
43 know secret sources were quoted in formal documents.
44 • Page 4.3-8, paragraph 3, last sentence, `CBRE Consulting also noted a small retail center at the
45 southwest corner of Ford Road and North State Street that was being rebuilt after fire damage.'
46 That is a `heck' of an observation because I have been looking at this building for over a year with
47 blue tarps over it. The deli and gun store in the small retail center was known as Diamond Jim's
48 that has moved to the next building to the south. Diamond Jim's formerly occupied the left south
49 most end of the building in the complex that is still not repaired due to fire damage. A discount
50 store occupied a building in the middle of the retail center that is no longer in business and the
51 building occupied to the north in the retail center is still in business. Does not see any rebuilding
52 going on.
53 • Page 4.3-8, Willits Retail Market, paragraph 1, last sentence, `Given the distance to Ukiah and
54 other retail areas, it appears that Willits residents shop locally for most groceries and
55 convenience items but probably travel to Ukiah for a more diverse selection of apparel, general
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 16
1 merchandise, and other goods.' This indicates that distance is the reason for shopping locally
2 when possible and this does not make any sense since Willits is included in the market area. It
3 appears Willits residents shop locally, but how is this determined? Looks as though this
4 information is unsubstantiated.
5 • Page 4.3-8: Willits Retail Market, paragraph 2, second sentence, `This supermarket includes a
6 pharmacy, a Starbucks, and a more upscale selection of grocery items, similar to the Safeway
7 store in Ukiah.' Questioned the definition of`upscale.'
8
9 Carrie Hartman:
10 • One thing the EIR does not really address is that all the small stores are already gone like Purity,
11 Bi-Lo, all of those places.
12 • In reference to how vacant buildings get re-tenanted, so far it is just County and State agencies.
13 Bi-Lo is now an elementary school, the former Rexall pharmacy building is now occupied by the
14 County, The building where Purity used to be located is now occupied by the County. Is this
15 something the EIR should look at because we keep filling in buildings with our County and State
16 agencies every time a business leaves an area.
17 • It may be important to look at the previous EIR for the original Walmart project and look at some
18 of the issues/impacts being mitigated at that time but still have not been addressed such as
19 sidewalks on Talmage Road.
20
21 Jeff Blankford:
22 • Wanted to get back to the issue of wages and the connection to the EIR. We have to remember
23 this Walmart project is coming to the City of Ukiah requesting things of the City. You may be
24 aware of a recent Supreme Court decision that was overturned involving a class action suit
25 initiated by woman against Walmart for unequal pay received. The Supreme Courts does typically
26 cater to the corporations. It is important the Planning Commission get information as to Walmart's
27 wage structure.
28 • We have heard discussion tonight about the way Walmart pays its employees and how it lowers
29 working hours so that health care benefits are not paid and with Walmart employees having to
30 apply for government assistance such as for food stamps. There is no money to pay for many of
31 these government assistance programs. Our County is well into deficit. So the matter of wage
32 structure is a critical aspect. Are we going to contribute more to this problem by allowing Walmart
33 to expand? Wage structure information should be included in the EIR. Walmart should be
34 required to provide this information to answer the question, does Walmart in fact encourage its
35 employees to seek public assistance. Wage structure information for Walmart should be made
36 available to the community, the City and the County.
37
38 Dorothy A.:
39 • Walmart has a history of abandoning communities when things get tough.
40 • Walmart's food department would bring in more poisoned sprayed food from out of the area
41 may be even from China dependent upon a fossil transportation system in which we can expect
42 breakdowns.
43 • We know we are going to see infrastructure and grid breakdowns in the future. We have
44 bridges that are inadequate. This food is all coming from out of the Ukiah area.
45 • We have a very strong local movement to create a localized food supply that is an organic non-
46 poisoned supply and the last thing we need is competition from a cheap out-of-here corporation
47 where money leaves the community and goes into the corporate coffers somewhere else and is
48 not spent locally and does not support our local economy.
49
50 Commissioner Helland:
51 • Page 4.3-17: What rate of population growth is projected from 2010-2013 and what is the source
52 of that growth rate?
53 • Page 4.3-18 Footnote 20: `Retail vacancy is estimated at 5% or less by one retail broker who
54 works in the market area.' Who is this retail broker and was this estimate corroborated or
55 triangulated with others? If not, why not?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 17
1 • Page 4.3-19: `An estimated 584 new households are projected to be added to the market area
2 between 2010-2013 and these residents are expected to add approximately $12.9 million in new
3 retail demand.' On what is this estimate based? The US Census shows that the population of all
4 of Mendocino County only increased by 1.8% over 10 years.
5
6 Break: 8:20 p.m.
7
8 Reconvene: 8:42 p.m.
9
10 Chair Pruden: Asked that the public comments be more germane and/or focused on the EIR document.
11
12 CHAPTER 4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
13
14 Chair Pruden: One of the concerns identified in the EIR is loss of life or injury to people due to a seismic
15 event but only deals in the report with structure and geology when most injuries are caused inside of a
16 facility. Big box retail establishments are notorious for the stacking of inerchandise and saw no discussion
17 about injuries or the stacking process in the report. This issue may be addressed in the Building Code
18 regulations that merchandise that is stacked must be secure and earthquake proof in buildings.
19
20 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.4-8: Typographical error at of second to last line, .....building the also
21 city contracts....
22
23 CHAPTER 4.5: HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
24
25 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.5-5, Hazardous Building Materials Survey, second to last sentence, `A
26 survey did not identify any equipment that could potentially contain PCBs, mercury or CFCs.' Fluorescent
27 lights contain mercury and the store has florescent light tubes.
28
29 Commissioner Whetzel: Page 4.5-3, Table 4.5-1, Gordon Ag Service has not been around for a long
30 time and the site remediated some time ago.
31
32 Chair Pruden: Ernie's Chevron has not gone by that title for many years and to the west of this site there
33 is ground contamination from an oil company operation.
34
35 Commissioner Sanders: It is interesting of the 10 sites listed in Table 4.5-1, where groundwater is a
36 concern, 4 of the contaminated sites are on the Airport.
37
38 Chair Pruden:
39 • The sites listed in Table 4.5-1 should be identified by address and not by historical name because
40 some of these businesses have not been in business for more than 10 years.
41 • The table should be updated.
42
43 Commissioner Whetzel:
44 • There are monitoring devices all over the Airport.
45 • In response to public member inquiry about safety at the Airport(not audible), page 4.5-5, `project
46 located within an Airport Land Use Plan would not result in a safety hazard.' Table 4.5-2a & 2b,
47 Ukiah Airport Land Use Compatibility Safety Zones, lists land use compatibility safety zones and
48 their limitations. Page 4.5-11 provides information about the Mendocino County Airport
49 Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) that was adopted by the Mendocino County Airport Land
50 Use Commission. `The CLUP regulates land use through safety zones, noise zones, and height
51 restrictions and provides land use compatibility guidelines for lands near the Airport to avert
52 potential safety problems and to ensure unhampered Airport operations.'
53
54 Mira G:
55 • Was involved in the initial Walmart project and as a reporter one of the first things done was to
56 call the FAA office in Sacramento and asked if there were concerns about development occurring
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 18
1 near airports. The FAA responded it had concerns since airports are being lost left and right due
2 to development. We are at a stage where we cannot recreate an airport. We cannot just move
3 someplace else because land like this is no longer available. We can never really do expansions
4 anymore. The FAA spokes person was no longer available when I came to actually do a report.
5 • Has a great appreciation for the rescue and fire fighting services that are part of Airport
6 operations. The Airport is essential and there are no airports like the one we have in Ukiah. It is
7 really important to have the Airport.
8 • Apparently the City did a study about what may or may not happen around the airport.
9 • The Airport Compatibility Safety Zones A through D specifies what is allowable in each zone.
10 • Walmart is located within Airport Compatibility Zone C where large shopping malls are normally
11 not an acceptable use.
12 • According to Ukiah's standards for airports, there should not be a shopping mall in that area.
13 • According to Table 4.5-2B, 15°/o open space is recommended, which is not 'very strong' but is
14 quoted in the EIR.
15 • Just wants to plead with you to protect the Airport.
16
17 Chair Pruden: All developments must comply with the standards in the Airport Master Plan as they
18 pertain to density, safety, noise, height and other relevant issues or potential impacts. Walmart's density
19 falls within the standard because we do not want to shut an airport down so the compatibility issues if not
20 addressed in the EIR is addressed in other documents because an incompatibility cannot be created with
21 the Airport.
22
23 Commissioner Whetzel: Page 4.5-13, Table 4.5 2B provides information about the compatibility zones
24 including the density requirements for each zone.
25
26 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.5-16, Impact 4.5-2: Spell out Preliminary Asbestos Inspection (PAI)
27 instead of using an abbreviation, as the original definition is many pages back.
28
29 CHAPTER 4.6: HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
30
31 Commissioner Helland:
32 • Page 4.6-16: Mitigation measure 4.6-3: typographical error in first line.
33 • Page 4.6-17: Typographical error in second line, ....'toward into...' Choose one word or the other
34 word.
35 • Page 4.6-18-19: While the mitigation measures will assure there is no net increase in project
36 condition peak flows, and the filters should remove grease and contaminants, the mitigation
37 measures do not address the following requirements of the MS4 permit: 'Properly design the
38 areas to reduce impervious land coverage of parking areas and infiltrate or treat runoff.'
39 • Page 4.6-19: Mitigation measure 4.6-5, does not discuss how or to what extent water will be
40 infiltrated versus detained by Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs). Thus, it is
41 inadequate to conclude, as in 4.6-6, that `increase in the impervious surfaces under the proposed
42 project would not significantly affect groundwater recharge in the project area.'
43 • Page 4.6-21: As above, the treatments and mitigations discussed in 4.6-3 and 4.6-5 deal with
44 slowing and treating of storm water, and do no demonstrate how storm water will be infiltrated on
45 the site. It has not been adequately demonstrated that, together with the proposed Costco,
46 cumulative increases in impervious surfaces will not significantly affect groundwater recharge in
47 the project area.
48
49 CHAPTER 4.7: LAND USE AND PLANNING
50
51 Commissioner Helland:
52 • Page 4.7-3 & 4: The Airport Industrial Park development standards were determined through a
53 democratic process with extensive citizen involvement and reflects the will of the people of Ukiah.
54 The project should be modified with the development standards. Development standards adopted
55 by a city should not be modified for or determined by particular projects.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 19
1 • Page 4.7-4, Table 4.7-1 Goals GP-1 and GP-2: Goal-1: Promote, attract or assist in developing
2 businesses, particularly those that add value to resources already found or processed in the
3 Ukiah Valley. Goal-2: Promote business development, emphasizing local ownership of
4 businesses in order to keep capital growth within the community. The project is clearly not
5 consistent with either of these goals of the General Plan adopted by the City of Ukiah with
6 extensive public input. The EIR itself acknowledges (Page 4.3-8)that the project is likely to cause
7 store closures that `increase vacancies in and around the market area,' including possibly Lucky's
8 and Grocery Outlet.
9
10 A suggestion for a mitigation measure is the project could possibly be consistent with these two
11 goals if a condition of approval were a commitment to a high percentage (>30%) of local sourcing
12 of products, and patronage of local advertising agencies, banks, accountants, insurance agents,
13 legal counsel,janitorial and security services, construction, repair and maintenance, etc.
14
15 Chair Pruden: Asked if Consistency Determination was a product of ESA or some other source? Does
16 the Commission have to work through these consistencies determinations during review of the DEIR?
17
18 Staff: The `Consistency Determinations' in the document were formulated by ESA in conjunction with
19 staff. The Planning Commission will make the consistency determination. The Planning Commission can
20 make comments now about the `consistency determinations.'
21
22 Chair Pruden: It may be each Commissioner has a different opinion about the consistency
23 determinations. This matter can be revisited.
24
25 • Page 4.7-5, GP 29.3: Promote public transportation, services within walking distance in
26 neighborhoods, and any other feasible means of preventing needless vehicle use and pollution.
27 The consistency determination states, `While regional shopping uses rely heavily on the
28 automobile, the project is located at an existing retail site served by transit, and mitigation
29 measures will upgrade the bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure (see Section 4.10,
30 Transportation). Further, by including groceries, the store will provide a one-stop shopping
31 opportunity, which will prevent the need for customers to visit multiple stores for their general
32 merchandise and grocery purchases.' The goal is to promote public transportation services within
33 walking distances of neighborhoods and to prevent needless vehicle use and pollution. The
34 solution is to do one stop shopping according to the consistency determination. Most of us do not
35 consider one-stop shopping as perhaps an effective or consistent determination on this particular
36 GP goal and thus questioned whether this solution is compatible with the Ukiah General Plan.
37
38 Commissioner Helland:
39 • Page 4.7-4, GP-25.2 and GP-26: GP-25.2: `In areas to be developed or redeveloped, ensure
40 usable open space and common space.' GP-26: `Require that landscaping be a significant
41 component of development and redevelopment.' The project includes less than 20°/a landscaping.
42 This is not a `significant component' and does not provide for`usable open space.' The project as
43 proposed is inconsistent with these two goals of the Ukiah General Plan.
44 • Page 4.7-5 OC-13.1: `Maintain long-term sustained yield of the Valley's groundwater system shall
45 be the standard for evaluation for groundwater protection programs.' Not necessarily consistent.
46 While the mitigation measures will assure there is no net increase in project condition peak storm
47 water flows, and the filters should remove grease and contaminants, the mitigation measures do
48 not address the following requirement of the MS4 permit: `Properly design the areas to reduce
49 impervious land coverage of parking areas and infiltrate or treat runoff.' Mitigation measure 4.6-5
50 does not discuss how or to what extent water will be infiltrated versus detained by the Best
51 Management Practices (BMPs). Thus it is inadequate to conclude, as in 4.6-6 that`increase in the
52 impervious surfaces under the proposed project would not significantly affect groundwater
53 recharge in the project area.'
54
55 Mary Anne Miller:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 20
1 • Not going to go after General Plan text, but it seems there must be something that says we
2 promote a compact Downtown. Is looking for a compact downtown because if we continue to
3 approve projects of this large scale on the periphery we are never going to have a compact
4 Downtown.
5 • Asked staff if a goal or policy exists in the General Plan that promotes a compact Downtown.
6
7 Planning Director Stump: The Ukiah General Plan was adopted in 1995 and does not recall offhand any
8 goal or policy in reference to a compact pedestrian-oriented Downtown.
9
10 Chair Pruden; With reference to the Ukiah General Plan does not remember using the term `compact;
11 but does remember language that addresses the importance of local businesses in support of a local
12 economy. Mary Anne Miller brings up a good point that needs to be looked at.
13
14 John McClain:
15 • Is a person with disabilities and commented on the issue of one-stop shopping
16 • If there is an area where one-stop shopping is possible, it really benefits your life.
17 • He is not able to run from store to store or from one end of town to another.
18 • As a person with disabilities, he is on a very limited income.
19 • He appreciates the more upscale stores in this town and that they are local, but many times we
20 cannot afford to shop at them.
21
22 Alan Nicholson:
23 • Walmart's expansion is not consistent with the Ukiah General Plan or the Ukiah Valley Area Plan.
24 It is not a `go local' strategy. It does not promote a wakable, pedestrian friendly community, but
25 promotes a regional automobile centered mod adding to our air pollution and lowering our quality
26 of life.
27 • The Walmart expansion will clearly be a net loss to Ukiah. Rather than bring stability, this project
28 will have very long term destabilizing consequences.
29
30 Chair Pruden:
31 • Did notice in this section that cutting down the olive trees would mitigate several issues and
32 suggests that perhaps it does not mitigate all the landscaping and energy issues that were
33 brought up.
34 • Page 4.7-8, EG-5, 'The site design shall incorporate shade trees for energy conservation.' Again,
35 this section is talking about removing the olive trees. What this meant was getting shade over the
36 building that is the energy conservation strived for, 'but this one is a reach.' It is about putting
37 shade over a building at certain time of the day to help mitigate both the active and passive gains.
38 Putting olive trees in the parking lot will not save energy on a building.
39
40 Commissioner Helland:
41 • Page 4.7-8 EG-5 (Incorporate solar energy considerations into the design, review and approval of
42 all development): The project, while incorporating skylights in the food areas, does not
43 substantially incorporate solar energy considerations, which could include daylighting of the entire
44 store or most of it, passive solar design to reduce heating and cooling needs, solar hot water
45 heaters, or photovoltaics to create electricity onsite. The project as proposed is not consistent
46 with EG 4.1.
47 • Page 4.7-9 PR-13.3 (All new developments shall incorporate safe bicycle lanes in project street
48 design): A class III bike route is usually merely signage and not a designated safe lane. This
49 would be inconsistent, but the project is not a new development and thus this policy does not
50 apply.
51 • What the project calls for is a class III bike route. A class III is not a striped lane, it is generally
52 signage. Bicycle planning experts at UC Davis say that a bike route should only be signed and
53 established if bike routes offer a higher degree of service than alternative streets and if some of
54 the following apply: provide for through and direct travel, (kind of), connect discontinuous
55 segments of bike lanes from Hastings Road, (yes, kind of) signals and stop signs have been
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 21
1 adjusted to accommodate bicycles better than adjacent streets, (not so much). Obviously, some
2 kind of bicycle accommodation might be better than none since people will bike there. People
3 who don't drive, can't drive, lost their cars or licenses. Is definitely torn about putting them in an
4 area with a lot of traffic that has not had special accommodations made by bicyclists and where
5 there will not be a class II lane striped for them.
6 • Providing for sharrows which is a class III bike route signage option is probably acceptable and
7 definitely better than people riding on the sidewalk which is what is currently happening in that
8 location. Is hoping we can be creative whether the applicant can deed some right-of-way from the
9 sidewalk landscaped area between the parking lot and the road or the City can prioritize
10 eventually purchasing right-of-way to add a class II bike lane. Is not sure what the solution is, but
11 just signing that it is a bike route without a lane kind of gives a false impression of safety on that
12 street.
13 • Page 4.7-10: CT-6—CT-6.3: Signage with no lane markings (Class III bike route)does not qualify
14 as `providing bicycle lanes or paths....' This is not consistent. I think there is also a typographical
15 error in the Consistency Determination that reads, 'The proposed project includes a Class II
16 bicycle route along Airport Park Boulevard. If an adequate right-of-way exists, a Class II bicycle
17 route will be installed on Airport Park Boulevard.' Most of the EIR has referenced a proposed
18 Class III bike route (signage, no lane markings)for Airport Park Boulevard. Additional right-of-way
19 would be required for a Class II striped bike lane.
20
21 Commissioner Whetzel: In the General Plan — The goal is to support the creation the combined public
22 and private facilities in the Downtown areas for educational, business/civic and personal growth
23 purposes. The Policy GP 3.1 — Locate public and private facilities so they enhance existing Downtown
24 businesses; GP 3.2 — Promote the private development of a Downtown to promote a seven day a week
25 economy. Basically, this is all the General Plan says about the Downtown. There is no goal or policy
26 related to a compact downtown.
27
28 Chair Pruden: Suggests the Commission and public read through the General Plan consistencies and
29 those that do not seem consistent with the text submit in writing and turn before August 18, when the
30 public comment period ends for the DEIR.
31
32 Commissioner Sanders:
33 • Page 4.7-6, OC 16.1, `Protect surface water supplies from water generated in parking lots.' OC
34 16.2, `Manage stormwater flows to reduce the hazard of flooding from increased stormwater
35 flows.' This is a comment for the General Plan consistency determination because it only
36 addresses construction. The project will be pulling up a lot of turf and is concerned about the
37 bioswales that are being anticipated. How is this going to work with handling the contamination
38 from the parking lot and the flooding? Also, we are getting rid of and I think this is in the Ukiah
39 General Plan having tree planting strips so we are talking about putting trees in pots. It will take
40 10 years in order to have adequate shade coverage. What we have in the parking lot have a
41 bonsai effect on the trees so how are we going to know maintenance is going to result in
42 adequate canopy coverage in relation to the requirements in the General Plan for 50% coverage?
43 Does not feel this aspect is adequately covered in the document.
44
45 Commissioner Whetzel: This issue would be covered during review of the major SDP for the project.
46
47 Commissioner Sanders:
48 • The whole idea of surface water and getting rid of what is out there now and the potential impacts
49 does not believe these issues are being appropriately addressed in the document as mitigation
50 for construction and is bringing this to the attention of the consultant.
51 • Will submit additional comments in writing.
52
53 Commissioner Helland:
54 • Page 4.7-10: Policy CT-7 (Develop pedestrian access): It is great that sidewalks on Airport Park
55 Boulevard and Commerce will be provided, but a separated walkway through the parking lot to
56 store (from sidewalk) must also be provided to be consistent with this policy.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 22
1 • Page 4.7-11 Policy CT-11: (Encourage increased use of car—or van-pooling): Should maintain or
2 increase current rate of carpooling by requiring continuation of carpool coordinator position.
3 • Page 4.7-12 Policy CD 4.1 (Establish and enforce landscaping standards in all non-single family
4 residential, multi-family residential, commercial, and industrial development and all
5 redevelopment projects): The proposed landscaping plan is not consistent with the Airport
6 Industrial Park landscaping standards requiring at least 20% of the site to be landscaped.
7 • Page 4.7-14, Cumulative Impacts— Land Use and Planninq
8 The Project itself is not consistent with the 11 goals and policies enumerated in the document.
9 The cumulative land use impacts of the project and other developments in the vicinity are
10 significant. Impact 4.7-4: states, 'The proposed project, in combination with other developments in
11 the vicinity, would not contribute to potential cumulative land use impacts.'
12
13 Dorothy A.: Since the projected area for development is in an area that should stay open space for the
14 Airport, the only thing you can plant are these little lollypop trees that don't provide any substantial shade.
15 Recalls when trees were magnificent and the great Elms that provide shade in the eastern and New
16 England towns. Great shade trees can provide 15 degree difference in temperature. You cannot plant
17 trees that provide a lot shade in a protected area of the Airport in the flight zone.
18
19 Chair Pruden:
20 • We can in this particular area where Walmart is located call forth a significant tree planting
21 program. Trees that reach 80 to 100 feet would not be planted there.
22 • We are looking for shade so height is not so much of a factor as is canopy spread to get the
23 shade out over the parking lot and drop those temperatures.
24
25 Commissioner Whetzel: The trees for the site can be as tall as the Hampton Inn.
26
27 Dorothy A.:
28 • The other thing is we are in the flood zone. Downtown Ukiah does flood very seriously, in fact.
29 • Recalls people whose homes had three-feet of water in them.
30 • The last thing we need is more asphalt, more concrete and more paving.
31 • The reason we have all of this flooding is the paving of surfaces.
32 • Development is really retrogressive in an area like this.
33 • Lived in Denver for nine years that has beautiful bicycle trails. They are not just painted lanes in
34 roadways, which are really quite dangerous. At 73 years of age, am still a bicycle rider and has
35 been hit in one of those painted lanes by somebody who could not see to drive and dragged
36 underneath the truck. This was a terrifying experience. You need real bicycle lanes which are
37 separate and if you are going to have development then the developer needs to provide those
38 improvements and not dump it on the City.
39 • I am opposed to the Walmart expansion project. I do not see any great blessing to Ukiah that can
40 possibly come out of more big-box expansion.
41
42 Alan Nicholson:
43 • Page 4.7-12, CD-1.1, `Encourage appropriate scale, materials, setbacks, and landscaping to
44 enhance the Valley's beauty and historic fabric.' This project does nothing to enhance the Valley's
45 beauty and historic fabric. The consistencies determinations claimed are bogus and not
46 consistent with this goal/policy.
47 • CD-1.2, `Encourage developers to construct new buildings and settings of such quality that
48 Ukiah's future citizens will wish to protect them.' The project is a suburban sprawl, big box where
49 they are proposing to give us a curved section of roof to make it unique. This is a joke. The
50 project has no redeeming, enduring aesthetic qualities. It is not something the citizens of City
51 would want to protect in the future and is inconsistent with Ukiah's General Plan.
52
53 Chair Pruden: It has been noted the `consistency determinations' do not match up with some of the
54 General Plan goals.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 23
1 Mary Anne Miller: The General Plan goals and policies are chosen by whom? By staff, by Walmart, by
2 consultant?
3
4 Chair Pruden: As Planning Director Stump has indicated with regard to the consistency determination it
5 was a combination of staff and the consultant.
6
7 Staff: The process regarding the consistency determination was to review every General Plan goal and
8 policy and decide whether or not they apply to the project. If there was even a remote chance that they
9 could apply to the project, they were included in the table.
10
11 4.8: NOISE
12
13 Chair Pruden: Asked during the scoping session for the project about noise at night with regard to idling
14 cars, slamming doors, people getting in and out of vehicles and just regular human activity at a store. The
15 consultant indicated what noise might be measured at 60 decibels during the day may sound like 80
16 decibles at nighttime. She did not see any section in the document related to the shopper and what they
17 sound like at nighttime, especially between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The mitigation measures only address the
18 maintenance issues and no maintenance would be done in the parking lot at this time. Again, there was
19 no data given about the noise factor of the customer or any discussion about noise generated in the
20 parking lot at nighttime.
21
22 She attended a Super Walmart where a gigantic sale was going on at night in Florida. She was unable to
23 find a parking space in a very large parking lot. There were police in the store maintaining order. All of this
24 was going on at approximately 1:30 in the morning. She is thinking that perhaps these special sales
25 events do generate a great deal of activity at unusual hours. Regarding this middle of the night noise
26 where people come from great distances for a sale, the information addressing this type of activity is
27 deficient.
28
29 Commissioner Whetzel: Has some issues concerning this but they tie in with traffic.
30
31 4.9: PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
32
33 Chair Pruden: Public utilities section, Water Supply System: The document contains a lot of statistics
34 about flow and other associated data, as well as talks about the 85 new employees. It is anticipated that
35 1,000 to 1,500 new customers will shop at the store every day. What about toilet flushing? In a year's
36 time there would be a considerable amount of wastewater treatment facilities being used just in the way
37 of hand-washing and toilet flushing. There is no figure in the document that talks about the customer
38 creating a demand on the City's wastewater treatment plant and she is not sure why. Flagged this as an
39 issue.
40
41 Commissioner Sanders: Inquired if there could be a table for police protection under public services.
42 She was going through the text and was sort of creating her own table and noticed in 2008 there are no
43 statistics and inquired as to the reason. The range jumps from 2007 to 2009. It would be helpful to see
44 how UPD had to respond to this southern beat for at least a three year period because 2010 only goes
45 through June.
46
47 Chair Pruden: Page 4.9-11, Impact 4.9-1: Implementation of the Project would not result in the need for
48 new or physical or altered police facilities.' She agrees, but at this point believes a mitigation measure for
49 public safety issues at the site requires a security management plan. This factor is not mentioned in the
50 document and is not offered as a mitigation, but rather states the need for new or altered police facilities
51 is not significant and no mitigation is required.
52
53 Commissioner Helland: A security management plan is mentioned in the document. Will the parking lot
54 be patrolled 24 hours a day?
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 24
1 Chair Pruden: While the document lists many bullet points related to significant impacts to public
2 services, it does not refer to a security management plan. What needs to occur is to offer a security
3 management plan as a mitigation measure for public safety issues.
4
5 Commissioner Sanders: It is not her understanding that the general practice of Walmart uses staff to
6 patrol their parking lot.
7
8 Chair Pruden: Walmart may have to train individuals to do this.
9
10 Commissioner Whetzel: Or hire an outside security agency to patrol the parking lot.
11
12 Gene Hoggren:
13 • If you go south on Highway 101 past San Jose, you will come into three Walmart stores that have
14 armed guards in the store and the parking lot. It is a different culture there, but is a culture we are
15 currently experiencing. Security is very necessary.
16 • Has experienced problems with the public just coming into town a few times a month so security
17 is very important for the Walmart parking lot.
18 • When Walmart first opened, there was some type of security precaution for the parking lot.
19
20 Commissioner Helland:
21 • Page 4.9-6: Typographical error in first line of third paragraph: `.....two oxidation ponds for
22 evaporation/percolation.'
23 • Page 4.9-10: Identify the source of the significance criteria?
24
25 Brian Grattidge:
26 • The significance criteria is from Appendix G of the CEQA Checklist. The last bullet about energy
27 efficiency is from Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
28
29 Chair Pruden: It may be the criteria should be cross-referenced.
30
31 Chair Pruden: Did not see discussion about the impacts of a 24-hour store that would tie into public
32 safety. There needs to be a paragraph about this element.
33
34 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.9-11: Would the parking lot patrol be 24 hours/day?
35
36 Chair Pruden:
37 • Page 4.9-13, Impact 4.9-5: Implementation of the Project would not significantly increase the
38 demand for water supply. Again, this section talks about the 85 employees, but not the thousands
39 of persons per year that will be using the toilets. The document should at least indicate Walmart
40 will be using energy efficient commodes, etc.
41 • Questioned water usage for food preparation, particularly the vegetable department that uses
42 water to prep the food. There is no mention in the document about water usage in this regard and
43 recommends including some data. Does this include water for landscaping?
44 • Need to have information about the anticipated increase in gallons of water used.
45
46 Commissioner Whetzel: The watering of plants outdoors should also be factored into water usage.
47
48 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.9-13, states the building's water demand would increase 26 percent to
49 4,100 gpd from 3,250 gpd.
50
51 Brian Grattidge: This figure includes complete building operations and this is the number from the
52 Project's mechanical engineer as to what the increase would be for the square footage including
53 preparation, patronage, HVAC, and other systems.
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 25
1 Chair Pruden: Requested a sentence that is inclusive of everything such as garden, food preparation,
2 toilet flushing, etc. Would not say a 26% increase in water is any little demand.
3
4 4.10: TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5
6 Commissioner Helland:
7 • Page 4.10-14: last line typographical error`....at LOS E or F' instead of'E of F.'
8 • Page 4.10-29: Mitigation Measure 4.10-3d: Add 'A separated walkway through the parking lot to
9 the store (from sidewalk) shall be provided.'
10
11 Commissioner Whetzel:
12 • Page 4.10-2, Residential Roadways, Section does not mention the traffic impacts to Betty Street,
13 Lorraine Street, Orchard Avenue or Marlene Street since the Walmart store originated.
14 • With Betty Street straightened to go directly to Talmage and the Waugh Lane bridge closed Betty
15 Street is now the thoroughfare to get to Walmart from the north. Orchard Avenue, Marlene Street
16 and Betty Street have been used as access streets as a quick way to get from Gobbi to Talmage
17 for some time now.
18 • Because of heavy traffic on Lorraine Street and Betty Street speed bumps had to be constructed.
19 • Even the Parcel Post driver has noticed the increase in traffic on Betty Street.
20
21 Chair Pruden: There has been a substantial increase of traffic on the Betty Street, Lorraine Street,
22 Orchard Avenue and Marlene Street since the Waugh Lane bridge was closed. People are backing up
23 and going through Cooper Lane and right into these neighborhoods.
24
25 Chair Pruden: Page 4.10-2, Residential Roadways, questioned the connection of Mill Street in this
26 section to the Walmart project.
27
28 Commissioner Whetzel:
29 • Page 4.10-3, Pedestrian Facilities, 'Waugh Lane, Betty Street, Lorraine Street, and Henderson
30 Lane are all narrow local streets that provide access to residences on the north side of Talmage
31 Road. Sidewalks and streetlights are generally not provided along these local streets.'
32 • Traffic in this area has increased since Walmart initially opened.
33
34 Chair Pruden: A great deal of mitigation was done to get the Betty Street/Lorraine Street neighborhood
35 to stop being a shortcut to Walmart.
36
37 Commissioner Whetzel:
38 • It is still a shortcut to Walmart.
39 • Would like to see more of a study of that neighborhood.
40
41 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.10-29, Mitigation Measure 4.10-3d, recommends adding as a separate
42 mitigation measure for a separated walkway through the parking lot to the store from a sidewalk that will
43 be provided along Airport Park Boulevard.
44
45 Commissioner Whetzel: Noted when studies regarding street lights were done, much of the information
46 was done in February and should have been done in June or July when there is more road traffic. There
47 is more traffic in the spring and summer than in the winter.
48
49 Chair Pruden: Page 4.10-7, Existing Intersection Levels of Service, and identified the peak hours are
50 the highest volume in Ukiah from 4-6:00 p.m. The reality is some of Ukiah's peak traffic count actually
51 occurs between 2:15 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. when school is out of session for the day. A person cannot get
52 down Dora Street or through Gobbi Street and barely get off of Washington Avenue. In fact, a person
53 avoids those streets because they are so congested. There is also bus traffic because many Ukiah
54 children are bused to and from school.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 26
1 Commissioner Whetzel: Actually the congestion continues until 5:00 p.m. for those streets.
2
3 Chair Pruden:
4 • The peak hours for Ukiah are mid-afternoon and they are so severe at 3 or 3:30 p.m. that Gobbi
5 is impacted almost all the way from Orchard Avenue up to Dora Street. We do not seem to have
6 traffic studies for how the town functions for this. She realizes these are unconventional peak
7 hours, but there ought to be something about the fact that Ukiah has regular congestion when
8 school is released. School hours are staggered to help offset the congestion. The information in
9 the document does not truly reflect how Ukiah operates in terms of traffic and traffic congestion
10 and figures are slightly askew.
11 • Page 4.10-22, Trip Generation, a sentence in this section reads, `Based on guidance in Trip
12 Generation, the outdoor garden center area was excluded from the square footage applied to the
13 trip generation rates for both the existing and proposed Walmart store.' Does not know the
14 rationale for excluding the outdoor garden area. The figure is used in many other places but in the
15 trip generation it is not a square footage figure that they use. This will need to be clarified.
16
17 Commissioner Whetzel: Page 4.10-16, Future Transportation Improvements, With regard to the design
18 study for intersection improvements within the general vicinity of the Project area does not see and would
19 like to see improvements from Talmage Road to State Street.
20
21 Staff: The information represents the improvements currently being designed.
22
23 Commissioner Whetzel: Are there plans to widen Talmage Road?
24
25 Planning Director Stump: Talmage Road is a State highway. There have been discussions about
26 relinquishing that section of road in the area of Airport Park Boulevard to State Street to the City. The City
27 was interested provided the road is upgraded to City standards and includes the widening of sidewalks
28 and bicycle lanes. Most recently, the City negotiated with Caltrans to have this section relinquished.
29
30 Commissioner Whetzel: Can these improvements be added to future transportation improvements?
31
32 Staff: Not at this time until more information is known about the 2030 UVAP traffic model and associated
33 fees for future intersection/interchange improvements in the Project area.
34
35 Alan Nicholson:
36 • Could not find what makes a less than significant impact. I know this must be documented in
37 many places in the EIR document, but persons that do not frequently travel Talmage Road do not
38 realize there is a traffic problem there. It does state in the EIR that traffic does back up onto the
39 freeway.
40 • He lives in Talmage and experiences the congestion every day with traffic backed up on Talmage
41 Road from the freeway off-ramp to Airport Park Boulevard.
42 • Has observed that people cannot get off the freeway, particularly all day on Saturdays and early
43 on Sundays when people want to go shopping at Walmart. However, there are times when there
44 is very little traffic and times when there is a lot of traffic.
45 • The Walmart expansion will add thousands of people coming into that shopping area every day.
46 • Is of the opinion the EIR does not adequately address the traffic and congestion problem on
47 Talmage Road in the area of the project.
48 • The problems with traffic near the project area is dangerous now and will be more dangerous in
49 terms of public safety with the proposed project with the traffic impacts as addressed in the EIR
50 being brushed off as less than significant.
51 • He finds the traffic impacts in the vicinity of the project to be very significant and does not
52 understand how this criteria works.
53 • Elected officials are trustees for the public good and need to be fully informed about the
54 consequences of this project. The EIR can be certified and turned into a good document, but
55 finds it very deficient at the present time. The project should be denied for both traffic and urban
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 27
1 blight with non-mitigatable impacts to the environment and the economy. There can be no
2 overriding considerations. Essentially, the EIR can be certified and the project denied, as
3 proposed, whereby the project can easily move forward with the existing footprint. It is important
4 to give Ukiah the best project possible and do the right thing for the community.
5 • Has a problem with the perspective on some of these less than significant impacts in the traffic
6 and urban decay sections of the EIR.
7
8 Brian Grattidge:
9 • Clarified that traffic impacts for the project right now have been identified as significant and
10 unavoidable.
11 • Probably did not stress the point enough during the initial presentation.
12 • Traffic impacts related to the operation of Talmage Road and 101 southbound and Talmage and
13 Airport Industrial Park would be significant and unavoidable and this is despite requiring
14 mitigation measures from the applicant.
15
16 Chair Pruden:
17 • The staff report points out the significant and unavoidable impacts, some of which cannot be
18 mitigated.
19 • Page 4.10-16, Approach to Analysis, with regard to the future year 2030 traffic volumes figure
20 derived from the UVAP traffic model plan addressed in the EIR that provides if there is money
21 and the plan for intersection/interchange improvements can move forward the City would be able
22 to bring the intersections referenced back to `LOS A.' However, this is 19 years in the future.
23 What do we do in the interim? She has a problem with trying to figure out this how works in the
24 EIR document concerning the need for intersection improvements and the significant and
25 unavoidable impacts the project can bring. Again, while the document identifies significant and
26 unavoidable impacts some of which cannot be successfully mitigated does not provide a solution.
27
28 Brian Grattidge:
29 • The way the EIR looks at traffic is it identifies near and long term problems. The long term
30 problems include the list of projects that are used for the other cumulative analysis including the
31 potential Costco and other stores in the area and also takes the background volumes that were
32 used for the 2030 UVAP.
33 • There is an engineering solution to the problem. This project would be required to commit their
34 portion of Capital Improvement Program funding for improvements.
35 • The problem for purposes of the EIR as alluded to is that the other funding sources are not
36 solid enough. There is not an adopted UVAP fee that can be relied upon. There is not identified
37 state sources so even though there is a possible solution that this project would commit to, it
38 cannot be guaranteed within the time frame of our analysis of 2030 that this interchange would
39 be built; Therefore, the significant and unavoidable impacts. So sometime between now and
40 2030 there will be impacts where the level of service is deficient until such time as those
41 improvements can be made.
42
43 Chair Pruden: Is not sure the community can live with 19 years of backed up traffic. It is a concern and
44 the document identifies that a major problem exists that is underfunded. Her concern is that there is
45 essentially room for one more project if Costco comes. She is not sure if the proportional share of
46 Walmart and proportional share to Costco of CIP improvements will even be enough to alleviate any
47 impacts of the project.
48
49 Commissioner Sanders: We do not know the balance in the CIP Fund.
50
51 Chair Pruden: I do not think this community can live with 19 years of traffic issues in the Project area, but
52 perhaps between the two projects there is enough to successfully mitigate the impacts.
53
54 Planning Director Stump: When the project comes before the Commission for decision making, we
55 hope to have additional information about how potentially the overall traffic mitigation can be achieved.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 28
1
2 Dorothy A.: Supports what Alan Nicholson said and cited an example of the Coddingtown shopping
3 center and what it has done to the traffic in Santa Rosa. There are hours where a person is simply
4 backed up in traffic. We are talking five miles per hour and breathing all that pollution. It is not just traffic,
5 iYs air pollution. It is a mess and now they are building a whole new lane on highway 101 and we are in a
6 broken economy. It is not going to get any better if the money system collapses internationally.
7
8 Chair Pruden: This document clearly identifies that we have a problem with traffic and we do not have a
9 financial solution.
10
11 Mary Anne Miller:
12 • Does not understand the less than significant designation impact information that states `the
13 implementation of the project would increase the traffic volume on area roadways. This impact is
14 less than significant and therefore no mitigation measures are required.' She questions this
15 language and referred to her favorite page on the whole document 6-14, Section 6.5
16 Environmentally Superior Alternative, Table 6.5, Summary of Alternatives that provides
17 information about potentially significant and less than significant impacts with regard to the
18 environmental effects for each alternative in comparison to the proposed project She wants to
19 make certain the decision makers do not have to grasp for or even turn down proposed project
20 and waste all of this time and money in the EIR because there are alternative options. In the table
21 the environmental impacts listed, aesthetics (light/glare), air quality, economics/urban decay,
22 geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use,
23 public services and utilities, transportation and traffic, climate change and biological resources
24 indicate the potentially significant (PS) and less than significant impacts (LTS) prior to mitigation
25 with an indicator of +/- of whether the alternative impact is comparatively greater or lesser than
26 that of the Project.
27 • This section suggests the `no project alternative' would avoid all potentially significant project
28 impacts to all resources areas including aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, hazards,
29 hydrology, noise and traffic whereby the no project alternative would be the environmentally
30 preferred alternative, but CEQA requires that a second alternative be identified when the `no
31 projecY alternative emerges as the preferred environmental alternative.
32 • Questioned the table for alternative 3, No Footprint Expansion Alternative that shows these minus
33 less than significant indicators and finds it interesting the environmental topics listed as 'PS with a
34 minus' that have been reduced but have not been eliminated. The transportation and traffic
35 impact is listed as potentially significant.
36 • Would like to have justification for retaining a potentially significant level of impact on the
37 environmental topics of hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and transportation and traffic.
38 • With regard to Table 6.5, this is where if you are getting the right facts in the document you
39 would have reduced these impacts to less than significant, particularly for transportation and
40 traffic impacts.
41
42 4.11: GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
43
44 Commissioner Helland: Page 4.11-17 Second to last paragraph: Greenhouse gas emission
45 calculations for construction were completed `assuming that construction would take 6 months.'
46 Previously, on page 4.2-11 under Air Quality, `construction duration was estimated to be one year.' The
47 information is not consistent.
48
49 4.12: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
50
51 Chair Pruden: Page 4.12-15, Tree Protection Ordinance: `The City of Ukiah does not have a specific
52 ordinance relating to the protection of trees within the City limits. Tree protection measures and mitigation
53 for impacts to tree resources are typically incorporated into the SDP.' This is not correct. The City has a
54 street tree ordinance which governs right-of-way trees. What the City does not have is an ordinance
55 governing trees on private property. The City is codified for street trees. This information needs to be
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 29
1 corrected. All SDPs that have landscaping requirements are protected although this would not be an
2 ordinance on its own because if a required landscaping tree is removed, it must be replaced.
3
4 CHAPTER 5: OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
5
6 Commissioner Helland: Page 5-5: Effects Found Not To Be Significant, The introductory paragraphs
7 refers to the `significant unavoidable effects to climate change and transportation, identified above...'
8 While both were addressed in Chapter 4, only transportation was addressed in Chapter 5 under
9 Significant Unavoidable Impacts. `Except for the significant unavoidable effects to climate change and
10 transportation, identified above, the environmental effects of the proposed Project would be less than
11 significant or less than significant after implementation of the identified mitigation measures.' Was climate
12 change a typographical error?
13
14 CHAPTER 6: ALTERNATIVES
15
16 Chair Pruden: Is there an option to do a mix and match of the alternatives for the Project or do we have
17 to stick to the alternatives as presented?
18
19 Staff: Is the question related to can a new alternative be created as part of the EIR or how the
20 alternatives affect the decision on the project?
21
22 Chair Pruden: Can we create another alternative using the alternatives presented?
23
24 Staff: Do you want a third alternative analyzed in the EIR or are you concerned how it affects making
25 changes to the project?
26
27 Commissioner Whetzel: What Chair Pruden is likely saying is the Planning Commission may not want
28 certain components of the project as proposed.
29
30 Staff: This sounds like a project discussion. Is there some component missing in the alternatives that the
31 Commission has a problem with?
32
33 Commissioner Helland: May best be understood as how the analysis for the hypothetical alternative
34 helped to understand the environmental effects. If not, this can be answered in the final EIR.
35
36 Commissioner Sanders: Asked Chair Pruden if she had another option.
37
38 Chair Pruden does not have another option but there might be options where you consider one thing but
39 you do not necessarily want a certain component. For instance, with regard to the two-story alternative
40 that the food component would not be a part. In reference to the section on alternatives, the question is
41 does each alternative contained within itself or can you take a component from one alternative and match
42 it with another alternative so as to create essentially a new alternative.
43
44 Staff: Is the question: what is the purpose of a new alternate and what is missing in the analysis or not
45 understood with the alternatives that are presented.
46
47 Chair Pruden: Is asking about the process and whether or not there is flexibility. This reminds me of the
48 UVAP process where there were many alternatives and what results is a hybrid of these alternatives that
49 works. Is asking process wise whether or not a hybrid can be created for the Walmart project. The project
50 is required to have alternatives including environmentally superior alternatives as provided for in the
51 CEQA guidelines.
52
53 Commissioner Brenner: Is his understanding the alternatives are there for cross-comparison between
54 the different values for the CEQA by asking Walmart to put forth their best alternative judgment and/or
55 scenario by considering the positive, the negative and the in between scenarios.
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 30
1 Commissioner Whetzel: It does not really matter what building is constructed because this aspect will be
2 covered under review for the major SDP. For purposes of the EIR, we are interested in looking at the
3 square foot of the area for that site.
4
5 Commissioner Helland: Page 6.4, section 6.3.1, two-story alternative, Should pay more attention in the
6 text, for instance, why a two-story alternate would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
7 or unavoidable greenhouse gas emissions or traffic impacts. Does the document consider why a two-
8 story alternative would or would not be an environmentally superior alternative?What is the consideration
9 and how is the environmental effect addressed as an alternative.
10
11 Chair Pruden: Is not sure if every alternative has been identified. We are talking about alternatives to the
12 project and not alternatives to design.
13
14 Commissioner Whetzel: CEQA requires only three alternatives.
15
16 Staff: If something is missing in the alternatives, this should be identified now.
17
18 Brian Grattidge:
19 • If you approve something that is within the envelop square footage wise and operationally looks
20 like it but is not exact, as long as it is not more than that and fits within the box, you are fine. This
21 is why the three alternatives were selected. Basically, the analysis looked at the project which is
22 what the applicant wants and then took a range going from what the applicant wanted down to
23 zero in terms of square footage and this is the reason for the reduced project size alternative,
24 which is basically half way.
25 • The analysis had to look at what may be approvable and develop the alternatives accordingly.
26 • Would caution the Commission not to consider the two-story alternative namely because it does
27 not reduce any of the impacts and would probably have to revisit the visual issues west to east in
28 this regard. This may be problematic, but in terms of either a reduction of square footage or
29 operations probably would be possible within the range of alternatives that were provided.
30
31 Chair Pruden: Using the two-story alternative because it would be the most noticeable and more radical
32 of all of the approaches in terms of reconfiguring square footage that it is best to work within the
33 parameters that there may be some flexibility since most environmental impacts have been identified.
34
35 Commissioner Whetzel: `And still work within the parameters of the EIR.'
36
37 Mary Anne Miller:
38 • Referred to the Environmentally Superior Alternative table and if the Commission finds the
39 environmentally superior alternative does not lower the transportation and traffic impact because
40 of the 24-hour operation, for instance, then it is not the alternative that you want. The
41 Commission may want to eliminate that 24-hour operation component in addition to other
42 components. However, the Commission does not get that satisfaction because the EIR does not
43 tell what component of that significant transportation impact is due to the 24-hour operation. But
44 to eliminate this component, the Commission would have to justify that this is being done in order
45 to get a less than significant impact concerning transportation and traffic. The problem is the
46 significant impact cannot be separated out from the No. 3 Alternative, No Footprint Expansion.'
47 • She would prefer to see no footprint expansion and hours of operation reduced to 7 a.m. to 11
48 p.m. to lessen the environmental effects.
49
50 Commissioner Whetzel: Referenced the `No Project Alternative' and noted if the 7 a.m. to 11 p.m. hours
51 of operation were to remain, seven days per week, as opposed to a 24-hour operation no grocery sales
52 would occur and would essentially be a no project alternative. The `No Project Alternative' assumes no
53 change in the existing environment and would result in a continuation of existing conditions on the site
54 and would eliminate or substantially reduce all project-related impacts.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 31
1 Commissioner Helland: It is likely the reasoning in the document was that when the traffic queues are
2 going to back up to a significant unavoidable level is during peak hours and so the thinking was that this
3 would not occur overnight when it is going to be additionally open to what it currently is.
4
5 Commissioner Helland:
6 • Page 6-4: Under 2-Story Alternative: Another reference to 'significant and unavoidable GHG
7 emission' impacts. Is this a typographical error?
8 • Page 6-4: Typographical error on last line: `two Walmart stores.'
9 • Page 6-13: Typographical error: Transportation and Traffic, third sentence, `Weekend end....'
10
11 Chair Pruden: Asked if the document should contain a glossary of terms?A glossary may be helpful.
12
13 Staff: It would be helpful to know what terms the Commission would like defined to make the document
14 easier to understand. If the Commission would like to have a glossary it should be included as part of the
15 comments within the comment period. It may be helpful to define/clarify the acronyms. It may be a
16 glossary is not necessary but rather a better explanation of terms as they occur or by way of a footnote
17 for clarification.
18
19 Commissioner Sanders: A glossary is not likely necessary.
20
21 Commissioner Brenner: Would like the acronyms to be clarified.
22
23 Public Member: (inaudible) Commented on whether the City really has a say in the Walmart project.
24
25 Steve Scalmanini: Inquired about the number of square footage analyzed for the original Walmart
26 including the proposed expansion square footage that was approved for the initial project and how this
27 corresponds with what was built and the expansion currently being proposed.
28
29 Staff: Additional area for expansion was analyzed as part of the original EIR which analyzed a 93,000
30 square feet of store and an additional 30,000 square foot expansion. There is some concern this
31 guaranteed Walmart another 30,000 square feet without having to come back to the City for approval. As
32 part of the construction of the existing Walmart, they built the 93,000 square feet plus part of the 30,000
33 square feet approved as"expansion."
34
35 Planning Director Stump: Walmart decided they did not want to expand at the time when the original
36 Walmart store was approved. When Walmart proposed the expansion project the square footage went
37 beyond what the applicant originally anticipated for future expansion. While Walmart had approval for a
38 30,000 square foot expansion, they want a much larger building than the originally approved 30,000 sq.ft.
39 expansion, so the original 30,000 sq.ft. expansion matter from the City's perspective is now moot.
40
41 Alan Nicholson provided additional written comments as follows:
42 • Walmart in Ukiah expansion by 48,000 square feet primarily for the purpose of selling groceries
43 and competing in the local health and eye care business on 24-hour basis.
44 • As consumers and a city looking for revenues the project looks appealing on the surface. The
45 fundamental question before us is whether this proposed project is good for Ukiah or is it to be a
46 further negative impact on our city and community.
47 • The City Council, which will soon review the plan, will likely focus on the assumed sales tax
48 generation and job creation such an expansion will provide.
49 • It is important to recognize that an expansion of mainly grocery items will not generate a large
50 amount of additional sales revenue, and the assumed loss of two existing supermarkets could
51 lead to fewer jobs, reduced tax revenues, less consumer choice and create a significant vacancy
52 problem in the City of Ukiah and nearby cities.
53 • The issue for Ukiah decision makers is whether the environmental impact report has adequately
54 assessed the cost/benefits of this expansion. An objective evaluation shows there will be many
55 hidden costs.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 32
1 • Regarding product selection: except for private label brands, almost all grocery items are
2 available at existing stores. Walmart just undercuts everyone else and shuts down other tax
3 revenues for the City. As these other stores are typically anchor tenants, many lesser businesses
4 will fail as a result. This means that most, if not all, of Walmart's estimated increased sales
5 following the expansion will come at the expense of existing local retailers, which will increase the
6 potential for store closures and decreasing revenues for the City and County.
7 • The proposed project Economic Study is based on an economy almost four years old from 2008.
8 We are in a second downturn of a unprecedented global economic recession and the EIR
9 projections are clearly inadequate for Ukiah to rebound within two years. We will still be
10 recovering in five to 10 years.
11
12 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED: 10:03 p.m.
13
14 There was a brief discussion when the final EIR will be completed and when the Commission will review
15 this document and the project.
16
17 Staff tentatively stated the Planning Commission will likely review the final EIR and project in
18 approximately three months and explained the process.
19
20 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
21 None.
22
23 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
24 Thanked the public for attending and expressing their opinions.
25
26 12. ADJOURNMENT
27 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m.
28
29
30 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2011
Page 33