HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_07142010 1 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 July 14, 2010
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair Linda Sanders
7 Anne Molgaard, Vice Chair
8 Linda Helland
9 Mike Whetzel
10
11 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
12 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
13 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15
16 1. CALL TO ORDER
17 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by
18 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
19 Ukiah, California.
20
21 2. ROLL CALL
22
23 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
24
25 4. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - N/A
26
27 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—June 9, 2020 &June 23, 2010
28 Chair Pruden made the following correction:
29 June 23, 2010 minutes - page 9, line 14, sentence to read, `Would prefer the hunter with binoculars and a
30 crossbow as opposed to a rifle.'
31
32 M/S Helland/Whetzel to approve June 9 and June 23, 2010 minutes as amended. Motion carried (4-0).
33
34 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS- None
35
36 7. APPEAL PROCESS- N/A
37
38 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - N/A
39
40 9. OLD BUSINESS—WORKSHOP
41 9A. Downtown Zoning Code Workshop. Continued review and discussion of Section 12:
42 Administration and Procedures, Table 12B: Use Permit Procedures and Table 4: Allowed Uses
43 and Permit Requirements and the uses included in the table also will be reviewed and discussed
44 to determine by right uses and minor and major use Permits. Revised Section 13: Glossary is
45 also included for review and discussion.
46
47 Table 4A: Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements:
48 A= Use Allowed by Right
49 AC= Use Allowed Accessory to a Principal Use
50 MIUP= Use Allowed with a Minor Use Permit
51 MAUP= Use Allowed with a Major Use Permit
52 (-)= Use Prohibited
53
54 ZONES:
55 GU= General Urban
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 1
1 UC= Urban Center
2 DC= Downtown Core
3
4 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:08 p.m.
5
6 Homeless facility(small & large)
7
8 Staff: Definition of Homeless facility in the zoning ordinance is inconsistent with the regulations for
9 homeless facilities. Could be that the definitions were not revised when the regulations were created.
10 Recommend that this use be discussed when the Housing Element returns to the Commission so that we
11 better understand State Law requirements and what may need to allowed in order to comply.
12 Commission
13
14 Chair Pruden:
15 • Does not support having a homeless facility in any of the DZC areas. A good location for a
16 homeless shelter would be Porzio Lane behind Mendocino County Department of Social
17 Services. A Homeless facility should not be present on any City gateway.
18 • There is a difference between transitional housing and a homeless shelter.
19
20 Commissioner Helland:
21 • Should not prohibit homeless facilities in all zones.
22 • What about allowing for a homeless facility in the vicinity of the hospital?
23 • Agreed not a good idea to allow a homeless facility in the DC zone.
24
25 Staff:
26 • Could include `transitional housing' as a use in the residential zoning designation.
27 • Management Plans are required for Homeless facilities.
28 • Due to State law Housing Element requirements, it may be that consideration must be given to
29 providing for a homeless facility in some of the DZC districts. Recommend that this use be
30 discussed as part of the Housing Element when it returns to the Planning Commission in case
31 this use needs to be included in the DZC.
32
33 Commission consensus:
34
35 Homeless facility—small (fewer than 12 persons)
36 • Defer discussion until the Housing Element returns to the Commission
37 • DC = Prohibited
38 Homeless facility— large (more than 12 persons)
39 • Defer discussion until the Housing Element returns to the Commission
40 • DC = Prohibited
41
42 School—specialized education and trainina
43 Commission Consensus:
44 • Consider changing use in all three zones from MAUP to MIUP and require Major UP when the
45 use exceed 5,000 square feet of 100 lineal feet of street frontage.
46 • All zones = MIUP(4a)
47
48 Laundromat
49 Commission Consensus:
50 • Should be allowed in all zones, including GU since this is an important use if there are going to
51 more residents in the area.
52 • Major UP should be required when the facility reaches a certain size.
53 • All zones =A(4a); Major UP when more than 5,000 sq.ft. or 100 lineal feet on the ground floor.
54
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 2
1 Mobile Food Vendors—Stationarv and Mobile
2
3 Commissioner Helland:
4 • Provided supplementary information, `Healthy Mobile Vending Policies.' (Source: NPLAN
5 (National Policy & Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood Obesity. NPLAN is a project of
6 Public Health Law& Policy.
7 • Supports a healthy mobile food vendor category that would be 'Allowed' as opposed to other
8 types of mobile food vendors that require a MIUP as provided for in Table 4.
9 • Likes mobile food vendors. They should be allowed in the DC.
10
11 Staff:
12 • Clarified `Mobile food vendors' are located on private property and are not the vendors that are
13 located in the public right-of-way. This type of vendor is typically referred to as a "peddler" and is
14 not subject to zoning, but instead requires a business license and Police Department approval.
15 • An example of a stationary mobile food vendor is the snow cone business on South State Street.
16 • This type of use typically wants to locate on the site that has an existing use on it.
17 • This use can share the site with other uses provided site circulation and access, parking and
18 accessibility are specifically addressed. Use is less expensive than operating a restaurant.
19 • As part of the `definition' could provide language that there is a preference for and/or a desire to
20 encourage health food mobile vendors.
21
22 Commission Discussion:
23 • Mobile food vendors sell a broad variety of food that often includes the sale of healthy foods such
24 as corn on the cob and fresh fruits. No problem with the sale of tacos.
25 • Would it be appropriate to regulate according to type of food sold? Of greater importance would
26 be the general operation and overall aesthetic appearance of the business that includes the
27 parking lots.
28 • Human powered food vendors are not a nuisance. Such uses would require a business license
29 rather than review by the Planning Department or Planning Commission.
30 • Discussion about the DC zone and allowing mobile food vendors with a minor or major use
31 permit.
32 • There was discussion about the difference between a mobile food vendor and a mobile food
33 vendor—stationary.
34 • Mobile food vendors are appropriate in the Downtown. A good example is Frank's Franks that
35 operates in Alex Thomas Jr. Plaza.
36
37 Commission Consensus:
38
39 Mobile Food Vendor
40 • All zones = Minor UP
41 Mobile Food Vendor—Stationary
42 • GU and UC = Minor UP
43 • DC = Major UP
44
45 Farmers market—certified
46 Commissioner Helland: With 'certification,'the vendor at the market is required to be the producer.
47
48 Commissioner Whetzel: Then under the definition of a mobile food vendor, a person can essentially
49 purchase `fruiY from a retail store, for instance, and then sell it as a vendor riding a bicycle.
50
51 Commission Consensus:
52 • All zones =Allow, including GU zone.
53
54 Restaurant—fast food
55 Commissioner Helland:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 3
1 • Referred to a definition of a fast food restaurant incorporating specific criteria and noted it to be
2 similar to the definition in UMC section 9278 provided for in the Glossary, but with more detail.
3 • Noted Dennis Slota from the Mendocino Water Agency stated that drive-thru and fast food outlets
4 have the highest`pollutant loadings'for water.
5
6 Commissioner Whetzel: Questioned the definition of a fast food restaurant. Should `Subway' which is
7 essentially providing healthy food, be considered a fast food restaurant under the definition?
8
9 Commissioner Molgaard:
10 • Questioned what should occur if a `fast food restaurant' is sold.
11 • Supports banning fast food restaurants in the DZC areas.
12
13 Staff: Ownership is irrelevant to the use. If the use ceased, it would have to be re-established within 6
14 months. After 6 months, the use has to comply with the zoning regulations.
15
16 Jessica Stull-Otto:
17 • Consider a permanent business ban on fast food restaurants in the downtown area.
18 • Cited a fast food restaurant ordinance implemented by the City of Arcata that has been very
19 effective in protecting the community in this regard.
20 • There are a lot of waste products associated with fast food restaurants that has to be properly
21 disposed of and is very costly for communities. Requests that the issue of `waste reduction' be
22 included in the definition for fast food restaurants.
23
24 Chair Pruden:
25 • Fast food restaurants are mentally perceived in association with a drive thru. We have quite a few
26 fast food restaurants such as Burger King, McDonalds, Jack-in-the-Box, Carls Jr, that exist in the
27 City's gateways.
28 • The Downtown is a special area and supports not having fast food restaurants in this area.
29 • 'Panda Express' restaurants which are often located in shopping malls are fast food restaurants.
30 • The seating for fast food restaurants is typically tied to the counter, which is the primary element
31 for these types of establishments. Likes the example from the City of Cotati that addresses how a
32 particular restaurant functions, which is that the counter is not the primary entrance.
33
34 Commissioner Whetzel:
35 • Has a family member that manages 35 Taco Bell establishments and stated 95% of waste is
36 recycled for re-use.
37 • Noted New York City has a two-story McDonalds with a grand piano on the top floor and no drive-
38 thru. There is no room for a drive-thru in the DC. However, there may be some areas in the UC
39 that could accommodate a drive-thru restaurant.
40
41 Staff:
42 • Clarified the discussion is specifically about `fast food' and not associated with drive-thru. Drive-
43 thrus are addressed separately in the use table.
44 • To effectively address the definition of 'fast food' restaurants, provided examples of definitions of
45 formula-based fast food restaurants from other cities.
46
47 Marvin Trotter:
48 • Promotes healthy eating and healthy eating establishments in all areas of the community and not
49 limit to just the DZC areas. Recommends formulating a proposal that fits the community.
50 `Smoking' was banned in most public places including restaurants and the community got used to
51 the idea that smoking in such places is not allowed.
52 • Encourage local ownership of restaurants rather commercial fast food establishments.
53
54 Commission Consensus:
55 • The Downtown is a special area.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 4
1 • Willing to recommend prohibiting new formula fast foods based on the public comment, the
2 number of fast food restaurants in the area that would be allowed to remain, and that the
3 Downtown is a special area.
4 • Staff to draft a definition that is a 'hybrid'from the City of Davis, City of Cotati, and Wikipedia.
5 • All zones = prohibited
6
7 Maintenance/Repair—client site services and Maintenance/Repair—equipment, larqe appliances
8
9 Commission:
10 • Refer to Glossary
11 • Not appropriate to allow maintenance/repair for large appliances and equipment in the Downtown
12 since loading facilities are needed, sometimes there are items outside. No one wants to see old
13 refrigerators and other appliances stored on-site for repair.
14 • Okay to have client site service shop for repair/maintenance/sale of products because the repairs
15 would be done at the location of the customer.
16 • The parking standards for this type of business are part of the DZC.
17 • Consideration given to possible large storefront.
18 • DC represents a very small area. It is doubtFul maintenance/repair businesses for equipment and
19 appliances on-site would occur in this area.
20 • Steve's Auto Repair business was discussed and it was noted car repair is not part of this
21 definition.
22
23 Staff: There is no definition for auto repair for the DZC and this is not included as a use in the use tables.
24
25 Commission Consensus:
26
27 Maintenance/Repair—Client site services
28 • GU = Allowed A(4a); Major UP required when more than 5,000 sq.ft. or 100 lineal feet on the
29 ground floor.
30 • UC = Allowed A(4a); Major UP required when more than 5,000 sq.ft. or 100 lineal feet on the
31 ground floor.
32 • DC = Prohibited
33 Maintenance/Repair—equipment, large appliances
34 • All Zones = Prohibited
35
36 Personal service and Personal service- restricted
37
38 Commission:
39 • Brief discussion about `speedy pharmacies' in other cities and the ordinance restrictions placed
40 on these uses.
41 • Refer to Glossary; Supportive of prohibiting Personal services—restricted in all three zones.
42 • `Personal Services are allowed in all three zones. Include `4a' condition/restriction that `any use
43 exceeding 5,000 sq.ft. or 100 lineal feet on the ground floor requires approval of a Major Use
44 Permit In this way, the size of the building is restricted.
45
46 Chair Pruden:
47 • Requested clarification the list of services in the definition are `examples' and cited Danny's
48 Vacuum in the Downtown area and the Rent-A-Center business presently located in Raley's
49 Shopping Center as examples of'personal service' businesses.
50 • Would nail salons be a personal service?
51
52 Don Larsen: Is a yoga studio a personal service?
53
54 Staff:
55 • The rental of equipment would not be a personal service based on the definition.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 5
1 • Asked about how to address tattoo parlors/body piercing businesses?
2 • Nail services would be a personal service. Should this be added to the list of examples?
3 • Yoga studio is allowed as 'Studio—art, dance, martial arts, music.'
4
5 Commission Discussion: There was a discussion as to whether or not tattoos and body piercing had a
6 blighting influence that would be more consistent with the definition of personal services — restricted
7 rather than personal services. The existing tattoo shop was provided as an area example that was
8 appropriate and did not create blight. Also, the clientele is much different than what it used to be.
9
10 Commission consensus:
11
12 Personal Services
13 • Include tattoos and body piercing as an example under personal services.
14 • Include nail salons as an example under personal services.
15 • All zones = Allowed A(4a) for all zones; Major UP required when more than 5,000 sq.ft. or 100
16 lineal feet on the ground floor.
17 .
18 Personal Services—Restricted
19 • All Zones = Prohibited
20
21 Metal products fabrication, machine, weldinq shop
22
23 Commission Discussion: There was a brief discussion about fabrication (welding) businesses. Chair
24 Pruden has no knowledge of such an operation in the downtown area since World War II.
25
26 Commission Whetzel:
27 • Inquired how dental lab products that are primarily made by hand should be defined.
28
29 • The intent is for the Downtown core to be more about shops, restaurants/eateries, artisan shops,
30 live/work units, theaters, and other similar services and uses as opposed to uses such
31 manufacturing, repair, and other types of uses that do not fit in a downtown environment.
32
33 Staff: There is a difference between `Metal products fabrication, machine, welding shop' use and `Small
34 products manufacturing' use and this is the reason two separate definitions were created in the Table.
35 The potential issues with the metal products use are noise, compatibility with residential uses,
36 environmental and/or other nuisance impacts. This definition and use was included in order to distinguish
37 this use from the `small product manufacturing.'
38
39 Commissioner Helland: The definition of'small product manufacturer' indicates that these products are
40 made with hand tools.
41
42 Commission: Agreed the distinguishing factor in terms of whether these types of uses should be allowed
43 is those products manufactured by hand as opposed to equipment relative to various types of potential
44 impacts.
45
46 Commission: What would occur if a Metal products fabrication, machine, welding shop use or Small
47 products manufacturing use was being proposed, but not allowed.
48
49 Staff: The applicant could request a `Determination of Appropriate Use' whereby the size of the operation
50 would be a consideration.
51
52 Chair Pruden: Noted the manufacture of jewelry and/ other types of artistic products in a shop/facility in
53 the Downtown core would be an acceptable use.
54
55 Commission consensus:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 6
1 Metal products fabrication, machine, welding shop
2 • All Zones = Prohibited
3
4 Small products manufacturing
5 • GU =Allowed A(4a); Major UP when the use exceeds 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet.
6 • UC =Allowed A(4a); Major UP when the use exceeds 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet.
7 • DC = Prohibited
8
9 There was Commission discussion about tire repair and it was noted this use is not included in Table 4 as
10 an allowed use.
11
12 Telecommunications facility
13
14 Commission:
15 • The AT&T facility on Clay Street and Oak Street is a large telecommunications facility.
16 • There was discussion concerning telecommunications uses relative to a telecommunications
17 facility and equipment and referred to Attachment 3.
18
19 Staff: Noted while there is one `telecommunications facility' use category in Table 4, there are multiple
20 definitions.
21
22 Commission:
23 • Include antennas as part of the definition of `Telecommunications facility.' The Planning
24 Commission should review telecommunications facilities, particularly that involve towers and
25 antennas because they are controversial in nature even through antennas can be hidden.
26 • Huge building with no windows should be prohibited in the Downtown area.
27 • It may be that telecommunications facilities with equipment should be prohibited in the
28 Downtown.
29 • The Commission would most likely see a telecommunications facility project having antennas.
30 • Telecommunication facilities are also subject to federal regulations.
31 • What about the public library having the potential to function as a telecommunications use as
32 defined in Attachment 3?
33 • Do not want to prohibit anyone's personal satellite dish.
34 • Public safety requires Telecommunications facilities, such as the facility located at the civic
35 center.
36
37 Staff: Cautioned it may be difficult to formulate the appropriate findings to deny a telecommunications
38 facility if the facility is allowed with approval of a use permit whereas if the use is prohibited, there is no
39 exception or issue.
40
41 Commission consensus:
42 • GU = Major UP
43 • UC = Major UP
44 • DC = Prohibited
45
46 Drive-thru—restaurant, retail, service
47
48 Commissioner Helland: Recommends adding a separate category for`drive-up pharmacy' that would be
49 allowed in the some of the DZC zones.
50
51 Commissioner Whetzel: The aforementioned use would be categorized as `Drive-thru — retail' or `Drive-
52 thru—service.'
53
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 7
1 Commissioner Helland: Not certain if she supports the various types of drive-thru uses provided for in
2 the Table due to vehicle pollution and potential traffic and pedestrian hazards.
3
4 Chair Pruden: Drive-thru pharmacies are important for sick or handicapped persons to pick up their
5 prescriptions.
6
7 Commission:
8 • Other examples of drive-thrus include banks, beverages, car washes.
9 • Examples of a drive-thru —services would be banks, cleaners.
10 • Allow for drive-thru pharmacies and include this as the use in the table.
11 • Questioned whether car wash establishment fall under the drive-thru —service category.
12 • Important to specify what is allowed for a `drive-thru.'
13 • Pharmacies should be allowed for a drive-thru.
14 • Ukiah has enough drive-thru banks. Many are located outside the DZC boundaries.
15 • Keep in mind, the intent of the DZC is to encourage walkability as opposed to driving, as well as
16 to promote a pedestrian-oriented environment in the Downtown.
17
18 Staff:
19 • At this point, there is no definition of `drive-thru.' Staff is looking for direction as to what the
20 Commission would consider`drive-thru —retail versus `drive-thru —service.'
21 • Drive-thru coffee shops would be in the `drive-thru or drive-up restauranY category.
22 • Car wash is not included as a use. This would be a vehicle service which is not included as a use
23 or definition.
24
25 Jessica Stull-Otto: Further emphasized the hazards, particularly to pedestrians, associated with drive-
26 thru facilities.
27
28 Chair Pruden: Has no problem with allowing drive-up banks, pharmacies.
29
30 Staff: Cautioned there are some specific legal planning and zoning requirements associated with drive-
31 thru establishments, and reducing access to these facilities and impacts on people that require
32 accessibility accommodations.
33
34 Commission:
35 • The main branch of the Savings Bank of Mendocino County is actually located outside the DZC
36 boundary for the DC area. There are drive-thru banks in two of the three zones.
37 • Should likely have no drive-thru of any kind in the Downtown core.
38
39 Commission consensus:
40 • In the use table, delete drive-thru retail and drive-thru service
41 • In the use table, add drive-thru banks and pharmacies
42 Drive-thru restaurant
43 • All Zones = Prohibited
44 Drive-thru pharmacy, bank
45 • GU =Allowed
46 • UC =Allowed
47 • DC = Prohibited
48
49 Staff: Site planning is an important consideration for drive-thrus and the Commission appears to have an
50 interest in the site plan for drive-thru establishments. Based on this, review of drive-thru facilities should
51 be included as part of the site development permit tiers.
52
53 Adult entertainment business and Adult cabaret
54
55 Commission:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 8
1 • Definition of `Adult entertainment business' is not included in the Glossary. Is defined in the
2 Zoning Code.
3 • Adult Cabaret is defined in the Glossary.
4
5 Commissioner Molgaard: Questioned the word `specified' in the definition of Adult Cabaret and
6 recommended deletion of this word. This word suggests that in some other section of the code this is
7 "specified."
8
9 Staff:
10 • Read definition of`Adult entertainment business.'
11 • Need to add Adult Cabaret as a new use in Table 4.
12 • The `adult entertainment business' definition from Zoning code does not effectively cover all the
13 subject matter that may be of concern.
14 • Definitions define `nightclub.' A nightclub cannot include `Adult Cabaret' uses.
15 • Will review the word `specified' in the definition.
16
17 Commission consensus:
18
19 Adult entertainment business
20 • All zones = Major UP
21 Adult Cabaret
22 • All zones = Prohibited
23
24 Alcoholic beveraqe sales—replaces wine and liquor sales
25
26 Chair Pruden:
27 • There is a strong interest in the community to have wine tasting shops. How should this type of
28 use be treated since this is a form of liquor sales?
29 • The intent is not to have standard liquor stores with bars on the window.
30 • Some of the finest Brandy in the US is made locally.
31 • Should tasting room be considered as retail sales?
32 • Agreed there is interest in bringing tasting rooms to the Downtown.
33 • Tasting rooms should not be limited just to wine. What about beer, brandy, liquor, and other
34 specialties.
35
36 Commissioner Helland:
37 • Wine tasting should be treated differently because it is not a liquor store. Refer to definition.
38 • Questioned if use is left as a MAUP whether standard conditions can be added?
39
40 Commissioner Whetzel: Condition the square footage to control the size of the building. The Planning
41 Commission would essentially review a tasting room project.
42
43 Commissioner Molgaard:
44 • Having an establishment like Tierra is acceptable, but what would not be acceptable is a deli-
45 liquor store like the one located in the former Moore's flour mill store in the County.
46 • Recommends not leaving the `alcoholic beverage sales' too broad in order to avoid having more
47 liquor stores.
48
49 Chair Pruden: Cited an upscale 'cooperative' tasting room that sells a variety of goods and memorabilia
50 associated with wine tasting in another community as an example of what she would like to see for Ukiah.
51 While it is essentially a liquor store, it does not have that standard liquor store appearance. She supports
52 allowing for specialty shops/cooperatives that feature and sell local products in the Downtown area. An
53 added amenity is that tasting rooms/specialty shops have multiple functions, such as hosting events
54 and/or other community-oriented functions/programs. Sales tax revenue is also generated with the retail
55 products sold in tasting rooms/cooperatives.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 9
1 Commissioner Helland: Agreed tasting rooms, cooperatives, specialty shops would be appropriate in
2 the Downtown, but with conditions.
3
4 Staff:
5 • Alcohol sold as part of a larger business is considered an accessory use and not included in the
6 use table.
7 • Recommend adding `Tasting room' as a use and adding a definition.
8
9 Commission: Supportive of creating two categories, Alcoholic beverage sales and Tasting rooms and
10 allow staff to provide the appropriate definition.
11
12 Commissioner Molgaard: Supports prohibiting `Alcoholic beverage sales' in all zones because there are
13 already too many.
14
15 Chair Pruden: What basically occurs in this regard is the removal of the `mini-mart' aspect from the liquor
16 store of which there are numerous stores in Ukiah. The sale of a bottle of wine constitutes a liquor sale.
17
18 Jessica Stull Otto: Appreciates having the Renaissance Market located on the `Westside.' The market
19 sells food, beer and wine and other products and is convenient for the neighborhood.
20
21 Commission:
22 • This market is located outside of the DZC district.
23 • It was further noted the Renaissance Market is essentially a neighborhood market that sells beer
24 and wine since the market primarily sells groceries. The sale of alcohol is accessory.
25
26 Commissioner Whetzel: Inquired about the 'Grocery/specialty food store' use listed in Table 4 and
27 whether to change the use to read, `Grocery/specialty food and drink/beverage store.' The Tasting room
28 could be categorized under this use.
29
30 There was discussion about other conditions such as the Renaissance Market and what should occur if
31 the use changes.
32
33 Commission consensus:
34 • Add `Tasting room' as use and include a definition in the glossary.
35 • Provide standards for considering approval of a use permit for a tasting room.
36 Alcoholic beverage sales
37 • All zones = prohibited
38 Tasting Room
39 • All zones = Major UP
40
41 Smoke Shops
42
43 Commission:
44 • Discussed stores that sell drug paraphernalia, tobacco, hooka shops, and similar items.
45 • These can have a blighting effect on an area and are not healthy.
46 • Need to include this use in the use table and create a definition.
47
48 Commission consensus:
49 • Add Smoke shop category
50 • All zones = Prohibited
51
52 Fuelinq, qas station
53 There was discussion about liquid fuels and `electric charging stations.'
54
55 There was further discussion whether fueling, gas stations should be allowed in any of the zones.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 10
1 Chair Pruden: Referred to the City parking lot on Henry Street, and noted the former Shell station would
2 be an ideal location for a car detail/repair/service business in conjunction with the parking lot. Such a
3 business could pick up the car in parking lot and fuel/service it.
4
5 Staff:
6 • This use would be vehicle services which is not included in the use table or in the definitions.
7 • It may that in the future allowing for an 'Electric charging station' use category would be
8 appropriate. Currently, there are few such stations that they would be considered an accessory
9 use as opposed to a primary use. Table 4 addresses primary uses.
10
11 Commission consensus:
12 • GU = Prohibited
13 • UC = Major UP
14 • DC = Prohibited
15 • Add language to definition so that the use does not include individual electric charging stations.
16
17 Pet shop and Pet services
18
19 Commission:
20 • There was discussion about pet shops, kennels, and overnight boarding and what types of
21 animals would be appropriate for a pet shop.
22 • Primary issue is noise, both dogs and birds have the potential to create noise that could be a
23 nuisance. Having pets over night that do not create noise should not be a problem.
24
25 Chair Pruden: Addressed the issue of primary and accessory to principle use in this case and noted that
26 while Rainbow Ag sells farm/ranch equipment and products as the primary function, they often sell baby
27 chicks and rabbits, which is an accessory function.
28
29 Staff:
30 • Kennel is separately defined.
31 • The Rainbow Ag example would be considered an accessory use.
32 • Definition of pet services lists `pet shop' as an example. Need to make revisions to definitions to
33 address this.
34
35 Commission consensus:
36
37 Pet shop
38 • All zones =Allowed A(3); Minor UP when more than 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet
39 Pet services
40 • All zones =Allowed A(3); Minor UP when more than 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet
41
42 Parkinq structure—in location on Zoninq Map
43
44 Jessica Stull-Otto: Does not support encouraging driving whereby the intent of DZC is to promote
45 walkability and bicycle use and get people out of their cars.
46
47 Commissioner Helland: Should likely be some parking structure for people that commute to Ukiah and
48 want to leave their cars and walk in the Downtown.
49
50 Commission consensus:
51 GU = Prohibited
52 UC =Allowed
53 DC = Prohibited
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 11
1 Jessica Stull-Otto: Is pleased with the depth of analysis the Commission has taken with review of the
2 DZC document, particularly Table 4.
3
4 Community care facility—6 or fewer clients and Community care facility—7 to 12 clients
5
6 Commission: Reviewed different uses that are community care facilities as defined by California Health
7 and Safety Code Section 1502(a).
8
9 Commission consensus:
10
11 Community care facility—6 or fewer clients
12 • GU and UC = Allowed A(3)(4); Minor UP which more than 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet of
13 ground floor; and Major UP when more than 15,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet.
14 • DC = Prohibited
15
16 Community care facility—7 to 12 clients
17 • GU and UC = Allowed A(3)(4); Minor UP which more than 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet of
18 ground floor; and Major UP when more than 15,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet.
19 • DC = Prohibited
20
21 Animals in the City
22 Refer to Attachment 3, UMC Section 9182.
23
24 Brief discussion concerning chickens and bee hives. No more than 6 chickens are allowed in the City
25 limits and a minor use permit is required.
26
27 Commission consensus:
28 • GU = Minor UP
29 • UC = Minor UP
30 • DC = Prohibited
31
32 Restaurant—outdoor dininq
33
34 Staff: Is an accessory use to an existing restaurant. What typically occurs when there is no review,
35 expansion often extends into the parking area, sidewalks are encroached upon and other related issues
36 in this regard. A use permit is currently required for this type of use which allows staff to evaluate and
37 address these issues.
38
39 Commission consensus:
40 All zones = Minor UP
41
42 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:02 P.M.
43
44 10. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
45 None
46
47 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT
48 None
49
50 12. ADJOURNMENT
51 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:38 p.m.
52
53 Judy Pruden, Chair
54
55 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 12
1
2
3
4
5
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 14, 2010
Page 13