HomeMy WebLinkAbout02272013 - packet CITY OF UKIAH
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Wednesday February 27, 2013
6:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
UKIAH CIVIC CENTER, 300 SEMINARY AVENUE
2. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS CHRISTENSEN, DOBLE,
SANDERS, WHETZEL, CHAIR PRUDEN
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes from the January 23, 2013 meeting are included for review and approval.
5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The Planning Commission welcomes input from the audience. In order for everyone to
be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more
than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be
taken on audience comments.
6. APPEAL PROCESS
All determinations of the Planning Commission regarding major discretionary planning
permits are final unless a written appeal, stating the reasons for the appeal, is filed with
the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision was made. An interested
parry may appeal only if he or she appeared and stated his or her position during the
hearing on the decision from which the appeal is taken. There are no appealable items
on this agenda.
7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE
9. NEW BUSINESS— EDUCATIONAL PRESENTATION
A. Education and Training on the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Environmental Science Associates (ESA) will present an educational
training on the California Environmental Quality Act ('�CEQA 101'�.
Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodations. Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours
in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend.
The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities
upon request. Please call (707)463-6752 or(707)463-6207 to arrange accommodations.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report
(File Nos.: 11-01-REZ-SDP-CC-PC-CE/11-16-EIR-CC), South End of Airport
Park Boulevard. Conduct a public hearing to receive public and Planning
Commission comment on the Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The Project consists of the construction of a
Costco Wholesale warehouse and fuel station. The EIR analyzes a maximum
warehouse size of 148,000 square feet and a fuel facility of up to 20 pumps on a
15.33-acre site. The Project would include a bakery, pharmacy, optical center,
hearing aid testing center, food court, photo center, tire center, and fuel station,
along with the sales of 3,800 to 4,000 retail products. The tire center would be a
5,692 square-foot attached building with member access through the inside of the
main Costco building and would include retail tire sales and a tire installation facility.
The fuel station would be located in the southeast corner of the site and initially
would have 16 stations (with an option to expand to 20 stations. The Project site is
located on the east side of Airport Park Boulevard between Ken Fowler Auto Center
and the terminus of Airport Park Boulevard. The review period for the Draft EIR
ends March 15, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.
The Project requires City Council approval of a Rezoning, Planning Commission
approval of a Site Development Permit, and City Engineer approval of a Lot Line
Adjustment.
11. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
13. ADJOURNMENT
Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodations. Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours
in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend.
The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities
upon request. Please call (707)463-6752 or(707)463-6207 to arrange accommodations.
1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 January 23, 2013
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair
7 Kevin Doble
8 Linda Sanders
9 Mike Whetzel
10 Laura Christensen
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
14 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
15 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
16
17 1. CALL TO ORDER
18 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by
19 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
20 Ukiah, California.
21
22 2. ROLL CALL
23
24 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
25
26 Chair Pruden welcomed new Planning Commissioner Laura Christensen.
27
28 Commissioner Christensen introduced herself, provided background information about herself and her
29 interest for wanting to serve as a Planning Commission.
30
31 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes from the December 12, 2012 are included for review
32 and approval.
33
34 Commissioner poble made the following corrections:
35
36 Page 6, lines 22 and 26, change 50-foot clearance to 15-foot clearance.
37
38 Page 9, line 17, change M/S Whetzel/Doble to M/S Doble/Whetzel.
39
40 M/S Sanders/Whetzel to approve the December 12, 2012 minutes, as amended. Motion carried (4-0)
41 with Commissioner Christensen abstaining.
42
43 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
44
45 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters at this meeting, the
46 final date to appeal is February 4, 2013.
47
48 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
49
50 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by staff.
51
52 9. PUBLIC HEARING
53 9A. Pacific Outfitters Landscaping and Parking Plans and Outdoor Sales and Special Events
54 (File No: 09-25-SDP-PC and 12-20-UP-PC), 955 North State Street, APN 002-040-43. Planning
55 Commission and possible action on: 1)the landscaping and parking plans required as a condition
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 1
1 of approval for Site Development Permit #09-25-SDP-PC; 2) request for modifications to the
2 landscaping requirement(s); and 3) a Use Permit to allow outside sales and special events at
3 Pacific Outfitters, 955 North State Street.
4
5 Associate Planner Faso presented the staff report and staff is recommending approval of the Project.
6
7 Commission:
8 • Requested clarification that a lighting plan was required.
9 • Were changes made to the exterior lighting?
10 • Requested clarification the Commission is being asked to review the final landscaping plan and
11 parking plan for phase 3 as part of initial Site Development Permit, File No. 09-28-SDP-PC.
12 • Requested clarification the Planning Commission is also being asked to review the proposed use
13 permit for outdoor sales and special events.
14 • Requested clarification the request for modification to the landscaping requirements would be tied
15 back to the original site development permit.
16
17 Staff:
18 • A lighting plan was originally required for the Project and came as part of the Building Permit for
19 the original Site Development Permit for phase 1.
20 • No changes were made to the exterior lighting. The lighting plan was approved for the original
21 site development permit and found to be in compliance with City standards and the International
22 Dark Sky Association.
23 • Confirmed the Commission is being asked to review the final landscaping plan and parking plan
24 as part of phase 3 of the original site development permit and that modification to the landscaping
25 requirements would be tied to the initial site development permit.
26 • Confirmed in addition to review of the final landscaping plan and parking plan, the Commission is
27 being asked to review the proposed use permit for outdoor sales and special events.
28
29 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:12 p.m.
30
31 Brad Smith, applicant:
32 • The 14-day notification prior to an event in the parking lot is a problem. As he understands the
33 requirement, notification is necessary when Pacific Outfitters is holding an event in the parking lot
34 so that when people call with questions to the City Planning DepartmenUPolice Department
35 and/or other City departments/officials these departments have the information to confirm the
36 date and time of the event and that it is permitted and appropriately planned for. Is requesting the
37 condition be reworded so that Pacific Outfitters so that the notification is less than 14 days for
38 several reasons. The business does not always know when an event will be occurring. Special
39 events are different because they are planned for in advance and likely advertised. Occasionally,
40 representatives show up unannounced with a trailer to demonstrate a particular product and
41 parking spaces are used for the demonstration. In these cases, there is no time to give proper
42 notification. He has no problem notifying the City about an event, but to place a 14-day
43 notification restriction is a concern and poses a problem for his operation as a retail
44 establishment. Asks that the Planning Commission direct staff to reword and/or modify the
45 condition that 14 days prior to a special event, the applicant must notify the Planning Department
46 in writing of the proposed date(s)and time(s)of the proposed event.
47 • The reason for not having all the dimensions for the parking lot is due to grade/potential ADA
48 issues and other onsite constraints that needed to be worked out with the contractor. The issues
49 concerning the parking lot needed to be worked out before going to the expense of having an
50 engineer draw up the final plans for the parking lot. The first step in this regard was to get
51 Planning Commission approval prior to paying to have plans prepared.
52
53 Commission:
54 • Understands the site plans are not drawn to scale.
55 • Is the 14-day notification requirement a standard condition?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 2
1 • Understands with the many layoffs in the different departments at City Hall, it makes sense that a
2 reasonable number of days for notification is necessary to ensure all related City departments are
3 properly notified as to then an event is occurring. It may be, however, that a compromise can be
4 made as to a notification time that would be reasonable and appropriate.
5 • Had a policy question regarding the number of events. Attachment 4 of the staff report, Condition
6 of Approval No 3 with regard to `Special Events' states A) Factory demonstrations shall not
7 exceed six time per year and no more than one event per month; B) Parking lot sales shall not
8 exceed six times per year and no more than one event per month; and C) Customer appreciation
9 days shall not exceed six time per year and no more than one event per month and whether
10 these requirements are statutory?
11 • Requested clarification the Planning Commission is not necessarily limiting the number of days,
12 but rather expanding on the original request.
13 • Pointed out Pacific Outfitters parking lot is different from that of Home Depot in terms of what can
14 be done in the parking lot. The location, size and busyness of the street are different.
15 • It is easier to begin with a limit on the number of days that the Planning Commission is okay with
16 taking into consideration traffic and congestion issues and/or other impacts as opposed to having
17 to come back through the process and ask for more days after the project has been approved.
18 • Asked for clarification regarding the language for attachment 4, page 1 of the staff report, line 39,
19 item D.
20 • Wildflowers may be difficult to establish, however once rooted they thrive.
21 • Supports shrubbery in the planters.
22
23 Staff:
24 • Confirmed the 14-day notification requirement to Planning staff is a standard condition that is
25 applied to use permits that have outdoor sales/special events. If the Planning Commission is
26 interested in doing something different, five working days is the minimum number of days to make
27 certain City staff is properly notified that a particular event is occurring.
28 • The requirements are not statutory. The applicant asked for fewer days for events. Staff in the
29 conditions is recommending more days. With regard to evaluating potential traffic and circulation
30 impacts in the parking lot, staff was okay with the different events occurring because they are
31 considered special or occasional and unlikely to impact State Street. Staff is of the opinion the
32 applicant should have a few more events than requested.
33 • Confirmed staff is recommending more days that the applicant requested. This is based on
34 previous Planning Commission decisions that have allowed more days for events, outdoor dining,
35 entertainment and the like.
36 • Line 39 should read, `Only one (1) Special Event may occur at a time.'
37
38 Brad Smith:
39 • Is of the opinion Pacific Outfitters is doing a pretty good job of renovating an old piece of property,
40 including the building.
41 • Has noted since he has been in business, other businesses in the neighborhood on North State
42 Street have also made significant improvements to their properties.
43 • With regard to the various types of events, does not want to take away any more parking than is
44 necessary.
45 • Because the community has treated Pacific OutFitters very well, would like to have special events
46 that include factory demonstrations, parking lot sales, and customer appreciation days in addition
47 to outdoor sales and display uses.
48 • Appreciates staff allowing for special events not to exceed six times per year and no more than
49 one event per month. It is unlikely that his business would have more than six customer
50 appreciation days and appreciates the idea that six would be allowed.
51
52 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:22 p.m.
53
54 Commission:
55 • Has no issue with the applicant finishing the landscaping.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 3
1 • Likes having shrubbery in the planters to meet landscaping standards.
2 • The Flowering Pear is on the City's list for street trees. This type of tree species does very well as
3 street tree. Since the Flowering Pear does well as a street tree, it may be fine with the
4 Commission to possibly consider this tree species for the parking lot and noted the Strawberry
5 Tree has not thrived as well as the Flowering Pear.
6
7 Staff: Pointed out the Flowering Pear is not on the City parking lot tree list and they are being proposed
8 for use in the parking lot.
9
10 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED: 6:27 p.m.
11
12 Brad Smith:
13 • Does not have a problem planting shrubbery.
14 • Has had difficulty with landscaping and getting vegetation to grow in certain areas. Noted the
15 landscaping in the planter areas between Auto Zone and Pacific Outfitters has never done well.
16 He would have to get permission from Auto Zone to plant. Even though Auto Zone and Pacific
17 Outfitters share parking the planter areas are on the Auto Zone property.
18 • Planting wildflowers is a good suggestion.
19
20 Chair Pruden:
21 • In order to get landscaping to grow, the right type of vegetation must be selected.
22 • Year around shrubbery would work. There is a large variety that does well in the community.
23 • Can leave a few suggestions regarding shrubbery with staff. The wildflower concept is only
24 seasonal.
25 • Staff will likely have to check the requirements for landscaping when there is a shared parking
26 agreement.
27
28 Commission consensus:
29 • No problems with the Project findings and conditions of approval for phase 3 of the site
30 development permit as provided for attachments 1 and 2 of the staff report.
31 • Supports the substitution of Flowering Pear for the parking lot tree.
32 • Would like to see Poppies planted in the planter islands with the shrubbery. This would be
33 aesthetically pleasing and in keeping with the outdoor theme of the business as a sporting goods
34 store.
35
36 Commissioner poble:
37 • What City departments need to be notified for events and the reasons why?
38 • Is it possible to give 24-hour notice?Would this be enough time?
39 • While he understands and respects the staff time and inconvenience that is involved in the
40 noticing process, it appears with outdoor sales we are essentially shifting the burden onto the
41 business rather than just handling it at the staff level.
42 • Supports a 24 or 48-hour noticing period so as not to shift the burden onto the business.
43 • A business cannot be jeopardized because sales representatives wishing to do a factory
44 demonstration operate as they do and gives no notice that they are in the area other than just
45 show up in the parking lot.
46 • The focus should be on the business needs and how it can best be accommodated.
47 • A 48-hour noticing period is reasonable to notify staff of a special event.
48
49 Chair Pruden:
50 • Pacific Outfitters is not the only business in town that has special events. If a preference is
51 extended to this business, it must be opened for others. Is of the opinion staff does not have the
52 ability to accommodate a short noticing period for events, particularly if a number of notices
53 comes in.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 4
1 • At least a five-day noticing period needs to be given so City staff can accommodate the
2 businesses having events. It stands to reason that product sales representatives, for instance,
3 should be able to call ahead of time and advise of their arrival.
4
5 Commissioner Whetzel:
6 • To expedite noticing, it may be that businesses can advise City dispatch of an upcoming event
7 and dispatch disburse the necessary information to City departments.
8 • Supports a 48-hour noticing period.
9
10 Staff:
11 • The City often receives complaints and inquiries about events that are occurring.
12 • Typically public works, police, fire and planning need to be notified of an event.
13 • 24-hour notice is not a realistic timeframe. Staff's preference would be five working days.
14 Planning Commission has the ability to modify the condition. A reasonable timeframe is
15 necessary so that such City departments, including police know the event is permitted and do not
16 have to respond by sending an officer/official.
17 • The noticing process involves the staff. If the Use Permit limits the number of events, it is
18 necessary to track the number of events for compliance. If the business notified the City of one
19 event, the City knows that one of six events has occurred.
20 • The problem for the applicant is not being able to control when factory demonstrations will occur.
21
22 Mike Whetrel:
23 • Does not consider`factory demonstrations' to be a special event.
24
25 Staff:
26 • Factory demonstration is considered a special event as part of the use permit and how things are
27 regulated.
28 • There may be a way to determine the staff that needs to receive a notice should the event be
29 happening during the weekend. Proper noticing needs to be at least 48 hours. Is not sure how
30 weekend situations should be handled and this is the reason staff suggested five working days'
31 notice of an event. If a notice comes through on a Friday or Saturday, there is no way the
32 appropriate City departments can be effectively notified.
33
34 Linda Sanders:
35 • Do the businesses on State Street differ from the larger stores that have big parking lots such as
36 Home Depot? Understands the standard noticing time is 14 days. If so, is this standard applied
37 to businesses on our main thoroughfares like State Street and other streets or is there a
38 different requirement for larger big box stores? How long has the City been applying this
39 condition?
40 • Is the notification helpful?
41 • How many businesses along State Street do outdoor sales?
42
43 Staff:
44 • No threshold has been established on which the notice timeframe is based. The noticing
45 requirement began about four years ago as more inquiries and complaints about events were
46 being received. As a result, staff is informed of an event happening, and can check whether or
47 not a business complies with the use permit if there is a use permit and send notice to the police
48 department for appropriate dispatch to whoever might get that phone call so staff can respond to
49 the question. The 14-day noticing standard has been the condition of approval used regardless
50 of where the business is located. There are not many businesses that have re-occurring special
51 events.
52 • Just to have the notification that an event is happening is helpful for informational purposes.
53 • Has no knowledge how many business along State Street actually have outdoor sales events,
54 but it is likely the number is small.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 5
1 Chair Pruden:
2 • Does Commissioner Sanders see a timeframe that is reasonable between 14 days and 24 hours?
3
4 Commissioner Sanders:
5 • Foresees some problems with a 24 or 48 hour notice. The information is not going to get
6 distributed to all the appropriate departments when the public and other business may be
7 complaining about an event.
8 • Also, wants to steer away from Monday morning telephone traffic because people are calling the
9 City concerned about one retail business is able to have ongoing outdoor sales events.
10 • City staff needs to have notification for informational purposes why one business is allowed to
11 conduct outdoor sales or some special event.
12 • Has observed the parking lot for Pacific Outfitters is very active.
13 • Does not support reducing the noticing period to less than five days. Is of the opinion five days is
14 a reasonable compromise.
15
16 Chair Pruden:
17 • Requested clarification the 14-day notice concerns special events and not outdoor sales
18 according to finding 3C that states, `A condition of approval has been added that 14 days prior to
19 a special event, the applicant shall notify the Planning Department of the date and time of the
20 proposed event.'
21
22 Mike Whetzel:
23 • The City does not have a code enforcement officer so it would likely be the police department that
24 would have the information as to whether or not the event was permitted. If the noticing was 48 or
25 72 hours, it would be the police department who would be doing the checking to see if there was
26 an approved use permit.
27 • Supports a 48 or 72-hour noticing period.
28
29 Chair Pruden:
30 • It has been her experience that when calling about a possible violation regarding a use permit on
31 the weekend, the police department is called out.
32
33 Commissioner Christensen:
34 • Requested clarification about what is being called a `special event' because what likely occurs for
35 a factory demonstration concerning a trailer load of kayaks, for instance is that the trailer is going
36 to be parked in the parking lot. There will be no banners, balloons, bounce house and the like, but
37 rather extra merchandise sitting in the parking lot and is of the opinion this does not constitute a
38 special event.
39 • How should a special event be defined? She sees kayaks out in front of the business all the time.
40
41 Chair Pruden:
42 • It may be the applicant needs to further define what is being called a special event.
43 • Special event needs to be more clearly defined because the project for the proposed use permit
44 is being conditioned as to what is being called a special event as opposed to an outdoor sale or a
45 factory demonstration/workshop. It may be the workshop is the special event.
46
47 Brad Smith:
48 • Would like to describe the type of events Pacific Outfitters intends on having. The confusion may
49 be associated with the factory demonstrations/workshops. This is not really considered a special
50 event. While kayaks are displayed/shown on the site, they are moved to different locations such
51 as Lake Mendocino and considered by the City to be outside sales.
52 • A special event for Pacific Outfitters would be an event that is open to the public. Talked about
53 the type of `special events' his other sporting goods store have, such as a snowboarding contest.
54 A parking lot sale with special activities held once or twice a year would be another example of a
55 special event.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 6
1 • Having a product sales representative come by is not a special event either. Product sales
2 representatives come by all the time and sometimes park their vans/trailers onsite to show the
3 product.
4
5 Commission:
6 • Display of products is considered outside sales and not a special event.
7 • An event that involves customer/public participation is typically advertised for and/or promoted.
8 • City hall closes at 5:00 p.m. on Fridays for purposes of noticing events.
9
10 Chris Ostrom of Pacific Outfitters:
11 • His definition of a special event is an event that involves customer/public participation.
12 • Events that involve public participation are generally advertised, but there are times when
13 products sales representatives come with their team riders and trailers that open into a big box
14 for people see and/or to ride on the product, such as a bicycle. Such representatives show up
15 randomly and if you do not invite them to show the product, they simply move on. As such, they
16 have a `take it now or leave iY attitude.
17
18 Brad Smith:
19 • Having a 24 or 48 hour noticing period is reasonable. If, for instance, he was to have a special
20 event and found out on Wednesday and sent an email to the City the event was to be on
21 Saturday that is about a three-day notice. What if he was going to have an event on Sunday and
22 a product representative shows up on Friday to do a demonstration then this would be one
23 working day notice via email. Email is a communication tool that can be used anywhere in the
24 world anytime.
25 • The issue is about the definition of special events versus outside sales.
26
27 Staff:
28 • The distinction between outdoor sales and special events comes from staff. By Code anything
29 that is outside for display or sales requires a use permit and is considered Outside Sales and
30 Display. The conditions of the use permit the business currently operates under prohibit outdoor
31 sales/display. If there is any product outside, it is not allowed unless a use permit is approved so
32 what is trying to be accomplished is to distinguish between the request to have some outside
33 sales every day and as well as other occasional "Special Events." Condition of approval no. 2 for
34 the use permit speaks to the requirements for outdoor sales/display that occurs daily. A special
35 event is that thing or things Pacific Outfitters would like to do occasionally as described in the
36 project description from Pacific Outfitters. It appears the problem is with the factory
37 demonstrations. Staff's concern with regard to a use permit relates to public health and safety.
38 The intent is to provide proper noticing of an event and to use limited staff time wisely.
39 • Referred to the site plan that differentiates areas in the parking lot by various colors depending on
40 the proposed use for that area. Understands the applicant has requested factory demonstrations
41 occur in the pink area. The pink and orange designated areas on the coded map are more
42 concerning to staff because when those spaces get used there is the likelihood of blocking drive
43 aisles that could result in backing up traffic into State Street which could create an unsafe
44 condition for traffic and pedestrians.
45 • It may be possible to have factory demonstration events in the yellow or blue areas because
46 these areas are further away from the areas of concern. If the Commission agrees, the
47 Commission would need to determine the timing of notification of staff for these events. The
48 Planning Department needs to track these notifications for use permit compliance. The Police
49 Department needs to be notified because people do call the police to find out of this type of event
50 is approved, especially if it affects traffic. Notification of the police allows dispatch to inform the
51 caller that the use is allowed and prevents the need to send an officer. This is particularly
52 important on weekends when City Hall is closed and the only staff that can be reached by the
53 public is the Police Department. With limited staff resources, this can be an effective use of staff
54 time with limited imposition on the business owner. It may be possible for Planning Commission
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 7
1 can find a compromise to appropriately address the safety concerns and the needs of the
2 business.
3
4 Commissioner Christensen:
5 • Supports a notification period of somewhere between 48 hours and five days for a special event.
6 • Agrees when a special event is planned it is typically advertised for so that people will show up
7 such that more than 24-hours advance notification is necessary. It stands to reason then if the
8 event is planned and advertised, the City needs to be notified more than 24 hours in advance.
9
10 Chair Pruden:
11 • Is of the opinion City staff needs five working days notification and understands the difficulty on
12 the part of City staff of being able to get things done in a short timeframe.
13 • Staff has asked for 14 days notification and five days is more than a reasonable compromise.
14
15 Commissioner Whetzel:
16 • Can see where Pacific OutFitters may need to advertise for an event and plan ahead for it.
17 • Does not see a factory demonstration as a special event. It is related to outdoor sales.
18 • The use permit would have to be changed to distinguish factory demonstrations as being a
19 special event and separate this from the other use permit conditions.
20 • Special events are planned in advance, so City staff would be notified as soon as the applicant
21 plans and schedules the event.
22 • Factory demonstrations are not typically planned in advance and are typically seasonal.
23
24 Chair Pruden:
25 • Use Permit would allow Pacific Outfitters to conduct outdoor sales on a daily basis.
26
27 Commissioner poble:
28 • There is likely an opportunity to rearrange things to satisfy applicant and staff concerns by
29 possibly separating factory demonstrations from being a special event. The applicant is not
30 permitted to do outdoor sales of this type every day because only one parking space can be
31 used. To this end, Pacific Outfitters cannot use those other areas in the parking lot for that type of
32 activity; therefore, it has become apparent about the need to distinguish between factory
33 demonstrations and other special events by classifying factory demonstrations as outdoor sales.
34 • Factory demonstrations appear to be a very `clear-cut' activity where products sales
35 representatives come by on short notice whereas a parking lot sale would be advertised.
36 • Referred to attachment 4, item 3A that reads, `Factory demonstrations shall not exceed six times
37 per year and no more than one event per month,' and asked if this condition can be separated out
38 from a special event and require a 48-hour notice.
39 • May support rearranging where factory demonstrations can occur in the parking lot to make
40 certain congestion in the parking lot does not become an issue.
41 • Proposes to modify the location within the parking area that a factory demonstration should occur
42 and require a 48-hour notice.
43
44 Brad Smith:
45 • Factory demonstration is the event most likely to occur and is typically seasonal.
46 • It may take a day and a half to unload products so this is not really a sales event but rather
47 obtaining merchandise for eventual sale.
48 • Product sales representatives are an issue. Pacific Outfitters does not control the factory and
49 uses this term because there are also distributors. Factories have their own schedule of which
50 Pacific Outfitters has no control. Sometimes factory demonstrations pile up all on the same day
51 or, they come seasonally. They park next to each other on the days more than one representative
52 comes. As such, the representatives are typically gone by the second day.
53 • A special event is one where the public attends/participates. He has control over these types of
54 events.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 8
1 Staff:
2 • Delivering products to a store is not an event.
3 • Factory demonstration is a special event and should not be separated out as part of outdoor
4 sales.
5 • The parking lot sales and customer appreciation days do not seem to be an issue.
6 • Staff needs to be clear about the business needs related to factory demonstrations. Asked the
7 applicant about the worst case scenario that could occur with regard to factory demonstrations
8 and how many parking spaces would be needed.
9 • Asked applicant where factory demonstrations should be located referring to the colored areas on
10 the plans submitted by the applicant. Is asking the question because outdoor sales that occur
11 daily will take up one of the yellow spaces and this is where the factory demonstrations occur the
12 way the conditions are written.
13 • Related to parking and compliance with the use permit, staff would be okay with factory
14 demonstrations taking up two yellow spaces or all of the designated blue spaces instead of the
15 pick or orange designated spaces because this is a safer situation and less likely that complaints
16 would be received.
17 • Additionally, staff would be comfortable if there is a way for Pacific Outfitters to notify planning
18 and police even within 24 or 48 hours if the information is given to the right persons. It is
19 important to use limited staff resources wisely.
20 • It is really not possible to regulate factory demonstrations by season. For purposes of Planning
21 Commission decision making could say factory demonstrations occur on average two times a
22 month with maybe one month having four demonstrations and another month having none.
23
24 Brad Smith:
25 • Worst case scenario would be the need for three parking spaces to accommodate factory
26 demonstrations.
27 • Does not have a problem with having no factory demonstrations in the designated pink area.
28
29 There was further staff/Commission discussion regarding the different events Pacific Outfitters has, the
30 number of events anticipated and how to treat factory demonstrations, parking lot sales and customer
31 appreciation days in terms proper noticing and compliance with the use permit conditions of approval, and
32 the Commission:
33 • With the exception of 3A of attachment 4 and the 14 day noticing period that would affect 3A, is
34 fine with special events being noticed 14 days with the exception of factory demonstrations.
35 • Is okay with staff's recommendation that factory demonstrations be conducted either in the blue
36 area or the yellow area as provided for on the coded map for a total of four spaces such that one
37 space could be used every day and no more than four spaces can be used in the yellow and/or
38 the blue area because the business must provide adequate parking.
39 • Supports that factory demonstrations not exceed 24 times per year.
40 • Supports crafting a new condition #3 that special events include factory demonstrations, parking
41 lot sales and customer appreciation days.
42 • Supports renumbering and provide for condition #4 that separates out factory demonstrations
43 from parking lot sales and customer appreciation and more appropriately defines what should
44 occur for just parking lot sales and customer appreciation days.
45 • Supports with regard to new condition of approval #3 that only one special event can occur at a
46 time.
47 • Supports separating out factory demonstrations from parking lot sales and customer appreciation
48 days and create a new condition with specific requirements.
49 • Supports outside sales/display and special events that include factory demonstrations are
50 prohibited in the pink area.
51 • More appropriately define use permit finding 3C by modifying the language to reflect a condition
52 of approval has been added that 14 days prior to a parking lot sale or customer appreciation day
53 special event that proper notification to the Planning Department be given and add a new finding
54 that a condition of approval has been added that 48 hours prior to a factory demonstration special
55 event the applicant gives proper notification to the Planning Department.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 9
1
2 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:18 p.m.
3
4 Commission consensus:
5 • No change to Attachments 1 and 2 regarding the final parking and landscaping plan as required
6 for condition compliance of Site Development Permit 09-25 as part of phase 3 of the Project.
7 Planning Commission approved a substitution of species for the parking lot to Flowering Pear
8 based on information provided by staff in the staff report regarding landscaping.
9 • Planning Commission made the following modifications/additions to Attachment 4 for the use
10 permit conditions of approval based on the discussions above:
11 ■ No change to condition of approval no. 2
12 ■ Create new condition (This will be condition #3) to define Special Events: Special events
13 are limited to Factory Demonstrations, Parking Lot Sales, and Customer Appreciation
14 Days as described in the Project Description.'
15 ■ Modify existing Condition of Approval No. 3 and renumber to reads, 'Parking Lot Sales
16 and Customer Appreciation Days are subject to the following requirements:
17 A. Parking lot sales shall not exceed six times per year and no more than one event per
18 month.
19 B. Customer appreciation days shall not exceed six times per year no more than one
20 event per month.
21 C. Parking Lot Sales and Customer Appreciation Days are limited to the location shown
22 on the approved plans for the applicable type of Special Event.
23 D. The Parking Lot Sale/Customer Appreciation Day may only occur within the parking
24 spaces shown on the approved plan. No encroachment into landscaping, drive
25 aisles, backup space, or other parking spaces is allowed.
26 E. All items shall be removed from the parking area and located indoors overnight.
27 F. Overnight storage is prohibited.
28 G. Fourteen days prior to a special event the applicant shall notify the Planning
29 Department in writing of the proposed date(s) and time(s) of the event. Email
30 notification is adequate.
31 ■ Renumber condition 3D 'Only one special event is allowed to occur at a time.'
32 ■ Add new condition from Planning Commission and renumber that reads, `Factory
33 Demonstrations are subject to the following requirements:
34 A. Factory demonstrations shall not exceed 24 times per year.
35 B. Factory Demonstrations are limited to a maximum of 4 parking spaces. The parking
36 spaces used shall be the parking spaces identified as yellow or blue parking spaces
37 on the approved plans. No factory demonstrations shall be located in the pink area.
38 C. Only the location identified in condition #B for this item shall be used. No
39 encroachment into landscaping, drive aisles, backup space, or other parking spaces
40 is allowed.
41 D. All items shall be removed from the parking area and located indoors overnight.
42 E. Overnight storage is prohibited.
43 F. Forty-eight hours prior to a Factory Demonstration, the Planning Department and
44 Police Departments shall be notified in writing of the date(s) and time(s) of the event.
45 Email notification is adequate.
46 ■ Add new condition from Planning Commission and renumber that reads, `Outside
47 sales/display and Special Events (including Factory Demonstrations) are prohibited in the
48 pink area as identified on the approved plans.
49 • Planning Commission made the following modifications/additions to Attachment 3 of the Use
50 Permit findings based on the discussions above:
51 ■ Modify 3C to read, `A condition of approval has been added that 14 days prior to a
52 special event, the applicant shall notify the Planning Department of the date and time of
53 the proposed event.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 10
1 ■ Add a new finding and renumber that reads, 'A condition of approval has been added that
2 48 hours prior to a Factory Demonstration special event, the applicant shall notify the
3 Planning Department of the date and time of the proposed event.
4
5 M/S Whetzel/Doble to approve Pacific Outfitters Landscaping and Parking Plans and Outdoor Sales and
6 Special Events File No. 09-25-SDP-PC and 12-20-UP-PC with Findings 1-2 (attachment 1) and
7 Conditions of Approval 1-5 (attachment 2) for the final parking and landscaping plan required for
8 compliance with the Development Permit for phase 3 and Findings 1-3 (attachment 3) and Conditions of
9 Approval 1-17 (attachment 4) for the use permit to allow outside sales and display, yard sales, customer
10 appreciation days and factory demonstrations with the modifications and additions as discussed above.
11 Motion carried (5-0).
12 ATTACHMENT 1
13
14
15 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS
16 FOR FINAL PARKING AND LANDSCAPING PLAN AS REQUIRED FOR CONDITION COMPLIANCE
17 OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 09-25
18 955 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-040-43
19 FILE NO: 09-25-SDP-PC
20 AT 955 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-040-43
21 FILE NO: 09-25-SDP-PC
22
23 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
24 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
25
26 1. The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or
27 inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern and the accessibility of off-street parking areas
28 and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic on adjacent streets will not create a
29 hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses based on the following:
30
31 A. The Project includes the paving and striping of the existing parking facility and the
32 installation of landscape planters with trees. The parking facility would not be expanded.
33 B. Conditions of approval have been applied requiring: 1) parking plan to be submitted with
34 the grading plan that complies with the zoning ordinance requirements for parking
35 facilities; 2) planting of shrubs and ground cover in the landscaping planters; and 3)
36 limiting location of outdoor sales/display and special events to parking spaces only(no
37 encroachment into backup space or drive aisles
38 C. The proposed improvements with the conditions of approval would not create hazardous
39 or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern or change the pedestrian circulation
40 or traffic circulation.
41
42 2. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the
43 proposed structure(s)from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and screening
44 large expanses of paved areas based on the following:
45
46 A. The site is currently developed and a shared parking plan was previously approved by
47 Planning Commission.
48 B. The existing development and previous parking plan limit the opportunities for additional
49 landscaping.
50 C. The plans include new parking lot trees and conditions of approval have been included
51 requiring shrubs and ground cover to be planted in the planter islands.
52
53 ATTACHMENT 2
54
55
56 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 11
1 FOR FINAL PARKING AND LANDSCAPING PLAN AS REQUIRED FOR CONDITION COMPLIANCE
2 OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
3 955 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-040-43
4 FILE NO: 09-25-SDP-PC
5
6
7 1. Approval is granted for the Final Parking and Landscaping plan submitted to the Planning
8 Department and date stamped December 17, 2012 except as modified by the following conditions
9 of approval.
10
11 2. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff review and
12 approval:
13
14 A. Plans drawn to scale.
15 B. Landscaping plan, including the size, species, and location of trees, shrubs, and groundcover
16 to be installed. Trees shall be a minimum of#15 and shrubs a minimum of 5 gallon.
17 C. Irrigation plan.
18 D. Parking stalls, drive aisles and back up space that comply with zoning ordinance
19 requirements.
20
21 3. Prior to commencement of any activities included in this Use Permit, the applicant shall pay all
22 fees associated with this permit.
23
24 4. Prior to issuance of any building, grading or other permits for this property, the applicant shall pay
25 all fees associated with this permit.
26
27 From the Building Official
28
29 5. A building permit and improvement plans shall be require for installation of the parking lot and the
30 additional landscape planters.
31 ATTACHMENT 3
32
33
34 USE PERMIT FINDINGS TO ALLOW OUTSIDE SALES AND DISPLAY, YARD SALES, CUSTOMER
35 APPRICIATION DAYS AND FACTORY DEMOSTRATIONS
36 AT 955 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-040-43
37 FILE NO: 12-20-UP-PC
38
39 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
40 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
41
42 1. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as described under General Plan in the
43 staff report.
44
45 2. The project is consistent with the Zoning Ordnance as described in Table 2 of the staff report.
46
47 3. The project will not be detrimental to the public's health , safety and general welfare based on the
48 following:
49
50 A. The Project provides 26 parking spaces plus 16 spaces shared with the site to the north. The
51 daily outside display of items would only take up one parking space. During special events
52 (customer appreciation, parking lots sales, manufacturer demonstrations), a maximum of 4
53 spaces would be used leaving 22 spaces available for customer and employee parking.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 12
1 B. The proposed outside sales and special events would be ancillary to the existing retail use of
2 the site. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure that the outdoor sales and
3 special events remain ancillary.
4 C. A condition of approval has been added that 14 days prior to a Customer Appreciation Day or
5 Parking Lot Sale special event, the applicant shall notify the Planning Department of the date
6 and time of the proposed event.
7 D. A condition of approval has been added that 48 hours prior to a Factory Demonstration
8 special event, the applicant shall notify the Planning Department and Police Department of
9 the date and time of the proposed event. (From the Planning Commission)
10 E. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official, and
11 Public Works. Conditions of approval from reviewing departments have been applied to the
12 Project.
13 F. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
14
15
16 ATTACHMENT 4
17
18
19 USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW OUTSIDE SALES AND DISPLAY,YARD
20 SALES, CUSTOMER APPRICIATION DAYS AND FACTORY DEMOSTRATIONS
21 AT 955 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-040-43
22 FILE NO: 12-20-UP-PC
23
24 1. Approval is granted to allow outside sales and display, yard sales, customer appreciation days
25 and factory demonstrations as described in the project description and date stamped October 16,
26 2012, November 2, 2012, November 14, 2012 and December 1, 2012 submitted to the Planning
27 and Community Development Department, except as modified by the following conditions of
28 approval.
29
30 2. Outdoor sales/display are subject to the following requirements:
31
32 A. Days and hours shall be the same as the days and hours of operation for the retail
33 establishment.
34 B. Display/sales of canoes, kayaks, and other similar larger merchandise sold by the business
35 are allowed.
36 C. No more than one (1) parking space shown in yellow on the approved plans shall be used for
37 outdoor sales/display.
38 D. All items shall be located within the parking space identified in condition#2C above and shall
39 not encroach into landscaping, drive aisles, backup space, or other parking spaces.
40 E. All items shall be removed from the parking area and located indoors overnight.
41 F. Overnight storage is prohibited.
42
43 3. Special Events are limited to Factory Demonstrations, Parking Lot Sales, and Customer
44 Appreciation Days as described in the Project Description.
45
46 4. Parking Lot Sales and Customer Appreciation Days are subject to the following requirements:
47
48 A. Parking Lot Sales shall not exceed 6 times per year and no more than one event per month.
49 B. Customer Appreciation Days shall not exceed 6 times per year and no more than one event
50 per month.
51 C. Parking Lot Sales and Customer Appreciation Days are limited to the location shown on the
52 approved plans for the applicable type of Special Event.
53 D. The Parking Lot Sale/Customer Appreciation Day is allowed only within the parking spaces
54 shown on the approved plan. No encroachment into landscaping, drive aisles, backup space,
55 or other parking spaces is allowed.
56 E. All items shall be removed from the parking area and located indoors overnight.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 13
1 F. Overnight storage is prohibited.
2 G. Fourteen days prior to a Parking Lot Sale/Customer Appreciation Day, the applicant shall
3 notify the Planning Department in writing of the proposed date(s) and time(s) of the event.
4 Email notification is adequate.
5
6 5. Outdoor display/sales as allowed in condition #2 above are allowed on the same day as the
7 Special Events allowed in condition#3 above.
8
9 6. Outside storage of inerchandise is prohibited.
10
11 7. Only one (1) Special Event allowed by condition #3 is allowed to occur at a time.
12
13 8. To ensure adequate and easily accessible parking for customers, all employees shall park at the
14 rear of the building.
15
16 9. Prior to commencement of any activities included in this Use Permit, the applicant shall pay all
17 fees associated with this permit.
18
19 10. Prior to issuance of any building, grading or other permits for this property, the applicant shall pay
20 all fees associated with this permit.
21
22 From the Planning Commission
23
24 11. Factory Demonstrations are subject to the following requirements:
25
26 A. Factory Demonstrations shall not exceed 24 times per year.
27 B. Factory Demonstrations are limited to a maximum of 4 parking spaces. The parking spaces
28 used shall be the parking spaces identified as yellow or blue parking spaces on the approved
29 plans. No factory demonstrations shall be located in the pink or orange area.
30 C. Only the location identified in condition #11 B shall be used. No encroachment into
31 landscaping, drive aisles, backup space, or other parking spaces is allowed.
32 D. All items shall be removed from the parking area and located indoors overnight.
33 E. Overnight storage is prohibited.
34 F. The Planning Department and Police Departments shall be notified in writing of the date(s)
35 and time(s)of the event. Email notification is adequate.
36
37 12. Outside sales/display and Special Events (including Factory Demonstrations)are prohibited in the
38 pink and orange areas shown on the approved plans.
39
40 Standard Conditions
41
42 13. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
43 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
44 and issued/finaled.
45
46 14. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
47 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
48
49 15. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
50 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
51 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
52 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
53 and issued.
54
55 16. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
56 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 14
1
2 17. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
3 to building permit final.
4
5 18. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
6 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
7 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
8 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
9 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
10
11 19. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the use permit shall be granted only for the specific
12 purposes stated in the action approving the Use Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating
13 or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except to such specific purposes.
14
15 20. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
16 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
17 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
18 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
19 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
20 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
21 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
22 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
23 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
24 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
25 remain in full force and effect.
26
27 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
28 Senior Planner Jordan reported:
29 • There will be no Planning Commission meeting on February 13.
30 • It appears the draft EIR for Costco will be published January 30. The intent is get the document
31 delivered to Planning Commission on February 1.
32 • The public hearing on the DEIR is planned for February 27.
33
34 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
35 Commissioner Whetzel reported the Ukiah Airport Day will be held June 1, 2013.
36
37 Chair Pruden reported three Pistachio trees have been lost to a disease in the Downtown and she is
38 working with the Public Works Department to get these trees replaced by March. When there is a
39 disease, the same species cannot be used for replacement. Releaf is donating the trees. Releaf is also
40 working with the City Parks and Recreation Department for more trees in the City Park. A Chinese New
41 Year celebration will be held in February in the Downtown. This year will be the `year of the snake.'
42
43 12. ADJOURNMENT
44 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
45
46
47 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 23, 2013
Page 15
r ESA
�
CEQA 101
An Overview of the California
Environmental Quality Act Process
February 27, 2013
Cit ic��i � E SA
�C
J
r ESA
�
Overview
• Background and Purpose
• The CEQA Process
- When Does CEQA apply?
- When Does CEQA review begin?
- Who's who?
- Process
• I m pacts, M itigation & Alternatives
• Q&A
1
� � • � �
, .�„�, to�.,
i � • • � � � � T� �� �
� l � � �l _[
� � � � �� �
NATUR� .=�
;,,� ,..- :���'.C�.'..,,;Y.� rF,,!.�t: �� ,
r - • ` ��a
I
� . � ...�.�a���st�i]:n��i�i�5��. 'rfir.,•l� '
.���r. �_
_. � .
, �
!�� .�� � � � �
;��t ,°�'+� .�
..���t`�' .f��..n � - i
� •. -. . �� � � .� 1� �. � � �
. ��� . LIMD� LEAR ,�, . ��. EGYX$n 4.MFLSDR
�.. ,
IAN L . M �:HARG
Q
r ESA
�
What is CEQA?
� The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is
arguably California's most important environmental law.
It requires state, local, and other agencies subject to the
jurisdiction of California to evaluate the environmental
implications of their actions.
� Originated from an Assembly report called The
Environmental Bill of Rights.
� Signed by Governor Reagan in 1970.
� The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
became law in January, 1970.
r ESA
�
Purpose of CEQA
• CEQA requires public agencies to identify the
significant effects on the environment of projects
they intend to carry our or approve, and to
mitigate significant effects whenever it is feasible
todoso.
- OPR, 2008
• "The purpose of CEQA is not to generate paper,
but to compel government at all levels to make
decisions with environmental consequences in
mind ."
- Bozung v. LAFCO
Q
r ESA
�
Objectives of CEQA
• To inform decision makers and the public about
the potential significant environmental effects of
proposed activities.
• To identify ways to avoid or reduce
environmental damage.
• To prevent environmental damage by requiring
implementation of feasible alternatives or
mitigation measures.
• To disclose to the public reasons for agency
approval of projects with significant
environmental effects.
(Guidelines § 152002)
r ESA
�
Where To Look
• CEQA Statute
— Public Resources Code §21000-21177
• CEQA Guidelines
— CCR Title 14, §15000 et seq.
• Caselaw
— Court decisions interpreting and applying statute and
guidelines to specific cases
• Public Agency Implementation
— Local agencies may adopt implementing procedures
r ESA
�
The CEQA Process
When does CEQA apply?
When does CEQA review occur?
Who's Who?
The "Three Step" Process
r ESA
�
When does CEQA apply?
• CEQA applies to all discretionary projects
proposed to be carried out or approved by
California public agencies, including state,
regional , county, and local agencies, unless an
exemption applies. CEQA applies to private
activities that require discretionary government
approvals.
(P.R.C. §21001 . 1 , 21002, 21080; Guidelines §15002(i))
r ESA
�
What is a " Project?"
"Project" means the whole of an action, which has the
potential for resulting in either a direct physical
change in the environment, or a reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment, and that is any of the following:
(A) An activity directly undertaken by a public agency.
Includes planning activities
(B) An activity undertaken by a person which is supported, in
whole or in part, through contracts, grants, subsidies, loans or
other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies.
(C) An activity that involves the issuance to a person of a lease,
permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one
or more public agencies.
- Guidelines §15378
Q
r ESA
�
" Discretionary"
• "Discretionary project" means a project which
requires the exercise of judgment or
deliberation when the public agency or body
decides to approve or disapprove a particular
activity, as distinguished from situations
where the public agency or body merely has
to determine whether there has been
conformity with applicable statutes,
ordinances, or regulations.
(Guidelines §15375)
Q
r ESA
�
Examples of Discretionary
Discretionary Non-Discretionary
— Variance — Building Permit*
— Use Permit — Business License
— Tentative Map — Final Subdivision
— Any project that Map
has a combination
of discretionary &
nOn-discretionary * But may be combined with a
approval (§ 15268) discretionary process.
1
� • • � � � � � • � •
� � � • �
I
I � � I � � I � _ _ _ �
• � � � i � � � � � � �
. • • . • ' ' � � • �
� � � � �
� ' . • ' • ; : _ - -"` .G: -�.
� r
�Y. r'at •
i.:��r.h4 i.µ. _.y'/K 1M���
��� � � y F_-� �
� � � � ��r:, � � k`�•'1a�', r�~~} -
� 7-� �';�;.Y � � ,r�e.:_ . M `',
.� R�
,�f�...._ f� �,� � r
� 4{{ f� � � � ` f��..';Fa
�,
� � � � � � "�#�`'`` ��... �`�. � „ � 9
�t.
... '�ki�b '�* - M1' r4'�{'�
�r 1 ��`- hp �.a 'Y �•rx.ry``� �r �
� • � � • � l � l 3 . S 4 . if .
a_ f �. t
. } � ��:'�
• , / / , � ��t ��� ��y'`,�.�y-i� ~ `�7 ,y �r
FS ' `+�Fr�� f �'+ �
�y . f f �
{+. �•ti� ' �' �. .
q _'�t� � �E
n1 JJJ * t� �
� � ._ ' •��1 4 �f i .
L °k*`,, ry� +s.
. •� � {f ti�'.
r ESA
�
Who's Who
• Lead Agency
• Responsible Agency
• Trustee Agency
• Decision Making Body
r ESA
�
" Lead Agency"
• "Lead Agency" means the public agency which
has the principal responsibility of carrying out or
approving a project. The Lead Agency will
decide whether an EIR or a Negative
Declaration will be required for the project and
will cause the document to be prepared .
(Guidelines � 15367)
r ESA
�
" Responsible Agency"
• Public agency which proposes to carry out or
approve a project for which a Lead Agency is
preparing an EIR or Negative Declaration .
• Includes all state and local agencies other than
the lead agency with discretionary approval
power over the project.
(Guidelines � 15381 )
r ESA
�
"Trustee Agency"
• State agency with jurisdiction over resources
held in trust for the people of California.
• Trustee agencies listed in Guidelines � 15386:
- Fish and Game
- State Lands Commission
- Parks and Recreation
- University of California
• Trustee agency may not necessarily have
discretionary approval power over a project.
r ESA
�
" Decision Making Body"
• Any person or group of people within a public
agency permitted by law to approve or disapprove
the project at issue.
• When an advisory body is required to make a
recommendation on a project to the decision
making body, they shall also review and consider
the EIRorND
• Certain CEQA functions may be delegated by the
decision making body to staff.
(Guidelines § 15025, 15357)
r ESA
�
CEQA Document Flowchart
Preliminary Review
Is the action a "project"? Initial Study
Is the project exempt?
�
�
�
' Potentially significant No
; impacts? Negative Declaration
�
�
�
�
�
� Yes
�
�
� Mitigate to a less than Yes Mitigated
; significant level? Negative Declaration
i
No
Prepare EIR
r ESA
�
Exemptions
• Statutory (Legislative in origin)
• Categorical (Designated by Resources Agency)
• General Rule
- It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility
that the activity may have a significant effect on the
environment.
- Guidelines § 15061 (b)(3)
• Notice of Exemption : When a lead agency
determines a project is exempt they may file a
Notice of Exemption (NOE).
r ESA
�
I n itial Study
• An initial study is a preliminary analysis
prepared by the lead agency to determine
whether an EIR, negative declaration , or
mitigated negative declaration is required .
• If the lead agency can determine that an EIR will
clearly be required for the project, an initial study
is not required but may be desirable.
• May use a checklist format but must explain data
or evidence used (see Appendix G , Guidelines)
Q
r ESA
�
Consu Itation
• Lead agency consults with responsible and
trustee agencies prior to determining if a
negative declaration or EIR is required .
r ESA
�
Determining Significance
� Should an EIR be prepared? If there is substantial
evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the
environment, the agency shall prepare an EIR (PRC
§21080).
� Fair Argument Standard: If there is a fair argument that a
project may have a significant effect on the environment,
the lead agency shall prepare an EIR.
- No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal. 3d 68
r ESA
�
Conclusions of Initial Study
Lead agency prepares one of the following :
� Negative Declaration (ND)
� Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
� Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
r ESA
�
Negative Declaration ( N D )
A negative declaration is a written statement by
the lead agency briefly explaining why a project
will not have a significant effect on the
environment and therefore does not require the
preparation of an EIR.
r ESA
�
M itigated Negative Declaration ( M N D )
A mitigated negative declaration may be
prepared when there are potentially significant
effects on the environment, but revisions to the
project (mitigation) will avoid or clearly reduce
the effects to a less than significant level .
r ESA
�
Pu bl ic Review of N D/M N D
• Notice of I ntent
• Public Review
- 20 days
- 30 days if submitted to SCH (state review)
r ESA
�
Environmental Impact Report
• An environmental impact report (EIR) is a
detailed informational document that analyzes a
project's potential significant effects on the
environment and identifies mitigation measures
and reasonable alternatives to avoid significant
effects.
• The EIR is the "heart of CEQA."
- Inyo v. Yorty
r ESA
�
Key Elements of the EIR
• Project Description
• Environmental Setting
— Baseline
• Environmentallmpacts
— Direct and indirect
— Short-term and long-term
— Cumulative
— Growth Inducing
• M itigation Measu res
• Alternatives to the Proposed Project
r ESA
�
Types of EIRs
• Project E I R
• Tiered E I R
- Program EIR
- Master EIR
- Staged EIR
• Joint EIR-EIS
• Subsequent Documents
- Subsequent, Supplemental, and Addendum
(Guidelines � 15160 — 15170)
r ESA
�
Who may prepare the E I R?
• The lead agency
• Another public or private entity contracted to the
lead agency
• The applicant or applicant's consultant
• An independent contractor under a third party
contract
r ESA
�
The E I R Process
Scoping Draft EIR Final EIR
r ESA
�
E I R Scopi ng Process
• Notice of Preparation (NOP)
- 30 day review
- Optional Initial Study
• Scoping Meetings.
- Agency meeting upon request
- Required for projects of statewide, regional, or
areawide significance (defined in Guidelines §15206)
- Projects affecting state highways if requested by
Caltrans
- Other scoping meetings optional, but recommended
- Guidelines §15082
r ESA
�
Pu bl ic Review of E I R
• Notice of Availability
• P u b I i c Rev i ew of D raft E I R
- 30 days
- 45 days, if submitted to SCH (state review)
• Response to Comments
• Final EIR
r ESA
�
Final EIR
• Contains:
- D raft E I R
- Comments received on the draft (verbatim or summary)
- Responses to those comments that raise significant
environmental points
- Any revisions to the Draft as a result of the responses
- Other information included by the lead agency
• Typically prepared as two documents, but can be
one
• Review
- Public Agencies must receive a response 10 days prior
to any hearing on the project
r ESA
�
Certification/Adoption
• Certification of E I R or adoption of N D must be
conducted by the decision making body of the
Lead Agency.
• Prior to approval of project
• Findings required
• For significant, unavoidable impacts:
- Statement of overriding consideration
r ESA
�
Project Approval
• Lead Agency must approve or disapprove
project after certification/adoption of the CEQA
document.
• After project approval , Lead Agency shall file a
Notice of Determination with the county clerk,
and in some cases with OPR, within 5 days of
project approval . �
��
. �
.�
Q
r ESA
�
Time Line Summary
Certain Private Projects
E I R N D Exe m pt
Completion 1 year 6 months NA
Approval by 180 days 60 days 60 days
Lead Agency
Responsible 180 days 180 days 180 days
Agency
r ESA
�
Questions about the process?
r ESA
�
I m acts
p
Baseline, Thresholds of Significance ,
I m pacts and M itigation
r ESA
�
I m pacts
� A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in
any of the physical conditions in the area affected by the
project (Guidelines § 15002 and 15382).
� Under CEQA, environmental impacts include :
— Direct
— Indirect
— Short term
— Long term
— Cumulative
— Growth-Inducing
r ESA
�
Significant Impact
Threshold
Baseline
r ESA
�
Defining the Environment
• Physical conditions including land , air, water,
minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and
objects of historical or aesthetic significance
• The environment includes both natural and man-
made conditions
• Socio-economic changes are not treated as
significant effects on the environment*
Guidelines § 15360
* But are considered by CEQA in particular areas.
r ESA
�
What is the basel i ne?
� Under CEQA, the environmental baseline is the physical
environmental conditions as they exist at the time the NOP
is published, or the time environmental analysis is
commenced (if no NOP)
- Guidelines § 15125[a])
� No-project is not same as baseline unless no reasonably
foreseeable changes will occur to environmental setting
- Guidelines § 15126(e)(1 )
� An alternative baseline (i.e. past or future) may be
permissible if supported by substantial evidence
- Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of
Supervisors (2001 ) 87 Cal.App.4th 99
r ESA
�
Thresholds of Significance
• A threshold of significance is an identifiable
quantitative, qualitative or performance level of
an environmental effect.
• Agencies are encouraged to develop thresholds
of significance to use in determining the
significance of environmental effects.
• Thresholds are often derived from Appendix G
• Other sources: existing regulations, general plan
policies, professional standards, previous EIRs
r ESA
�
I n d i re ct I m p a cts
� CEQA requires an analysis of "reasonably foreseeable"
indirect impacts
� "Secondary impacts"
� Examples
- Impacts related to providing additional water resources (SB
610 Analysis)
- Impacts caused by mitigation measures (must be analyzed if
different from the project, but at a lesser level of detail)
� Growth-Inducing Impacts
- Form of indirect impact, but must be identified in the EIR
- Example: Expansion of wastewater treatment plant to
accommodate project removes barrier to additional growth
r ESA
�
Cumulative Impacts
• Effects that are individually limited , but potentially
significant when viewed in connection with past,
present, and probable future projects
• Define the cumulative environment
- Will vary by resource
• Project list vs. projections
- List of past, present and probable future projects
- Projections: Is there a recent general plan EIR or other
programmatic document available?
• Some impacts are easier than others . . .
r ESA
�
Significant Cumulative Impact
Threshold
Baseline
r ESA
�
Socio-economic Effects?
• Economic or social effects of a project shall not
be treated as significant effects on the
environment (§ 15131 [a]).
- "CEQA is not a fair competition statutory scheme."
(Waste Mgt of Alameda Co. v. Alameda Co., 2000)
• Where a physical change is caused by
economic or social effects of a project, the
physical change may be regarded as a
significant effect (§ 15064[e]).
- See Friends of Davis v. City of Davis (2000), Citizens
for Quality Growth v. City of Mt. Shasta (1988)
r ESA
�
Socio-economic Effects?
• " . . . in appropriate circumstances CEQA
requires urban decay or deterioration to be
considered as an indirect environmental effect of
a proposed project."
- Bakersfie/d Citizens for Local Control v. City of
Bakersfie/d (2004)
• Other socio-economic considerations in CEQA
- Thresholds of significance (§15131 [b])
- Feasibility of mitigation and/or alternatives (§15131 [c])
r ESA
�
Duty to Mitigate
� CEQA includes a duty to avoid or substantially reduce
environmental effects (§ 15021 )
� Incorporate all feasible alternatives or mitigation measures
� How is mitigation defined?
� Mitigation monitoring
r ESA
�
M itigation I ncl udes . . .
• Avoiding the impact
• Minimizing impacts
• Rectifying the impact (by repairing , rehabilitating ,
or restoring the impacted environment)
• Reducing or eliminating the impact over the time
(by preservation or maintenance)
• Compensating for the impact (by replacing or
providing substitute resources or environments)
r ESA
�
Mitigated Impact
Threshold
Baseline
r ESA
�
Alternatives Analysis
� An EIR must describe a range of reasonable alternatives to
the project (or to the location of the project) which would
feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but
would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects
- The EIR should identify alternatives considered but rejected as
infeasible during scoping
� Lesser level of detail: "The EIR shall include sufficient
information about each alternative to allow meaningful
evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed
project." A matrix may be used to summarize the
comparison.
Guidelines s 15126.6
r ESA
�
Alternatives Analysis
• Alternatives analysis shall include:
- A range of alternatives governed by the "rule of reason"
- No project
- Alternative location (or explain why infeasible)
- Environmentally superior alternative
r ESA
�
M itigation Mon itori ng
� A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is
required whenever the lead agency approves a project with
mitigation (EIR or MND).
� Lead and responsible agencies should coordinate mitigation
monitoring and reporting.
� Trustee agencies should provide a draft MMRP for any
mitigation measures or project revisions it proposes.
� Transportation information generated by the MMRP for a
project of areawide importance shall be submitted to the
transportation planning agency and Caltrans.
� Agencies may adopt standard MMRP policies.
Q
r ESA
�
When is CEQA "over?"
• Once a project has been approved , the lead
agency's CEQA role is complete, unless further
discretionary approvals are required .
- Guidelines § 15162
Q
r ESA
�
Subsequent Review
• Subsequent review may result in :
- Addendum (to ND or EIR)
- Supplemental EIR
- Subsequent ND or EIR
• Subsequent review vs. recirculation
- Recirculation occurs after public review has begun, but
before the document is approved (certified)
- Subsequent review occurs after the project is
approved, and further discretionary action is required
r ESA
�
Appeals
If a non-elected decision making body of a local
lead agency certifies an EIR, approves a negative
declaration or mitigated negative declaration , or
determines that a project is exempt, that
certification , approval , or determination may be
appealed to the agency's elected decision making
body (if any).
r ESA
�
Litigation
• Must be brought within statute of limitations
• Must be brought by a person or organization who
provided comment on the adequacy of CEQA
compliance prior to project approval
- Except the State Attorney General!
r ESA
�
Questions?
1 ITEM NO. 10A
Community Development and Planning Department
L�ity of Zikah 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
planninq c(�.cityofukiah.com
(707)463-6203
2
3 DATE: February 27, 2013
4
5 TO: Planning Commission
6
7 FROM: Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
8
9 SUBJECT: Review of and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the
10 Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station
11 East side of Airport Park Boulevard between Ken Fowler Auto Center and the
12 southern terminus of Airport Park Boulevard
13 APNs: 180-110-08, 09, and10; 180-080-57, 58, 59, and 62-67
14 File Nos.: 11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
15
16 RECOMMENDATION
17
18 Staff recommends Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, receive public comment, and
19 provide Planning Commission comment on the draft environmental impact report (DEIR) for the
20 proposed Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station project ("Project").
21
22 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
23
24 An application has been received from David Babcock and Associates on behalf of Costco for
25 approval of a rezoning, major site development permit, and lot line adjustment to allow the
26 construction of a Costco Warehouse and fuel station on the east side of Airport Park Boulevard
27 between Ken Fowler Auto Center and the southern terminus of Airport Park Boulevard in the
28 Airport Industrial Park (AIP).
29
3o The EIR analyzes a maximum warehouse size of 148,000 square feet and a fuel facility of up to
31 20 pumps on a 15.33-acre site. The proposed Costco warehouse would include a bakery,
32 pharmacy, optical center, hearing aid testing center, food court, photo center, tire center, and
33 fuel station, along with the sales of 3,800 to 4,000 retail products. The tire center would be a
34 5,692 square-foot attached building with member access through the inside of the main Costco
35 building and would include retail tire sales and a tire installation facility. The fuel station, located
36 in the southeast corner of the site, would have 16 stations initially (and an option to expand to
37 20 stations) and a 2,816 square-foot canopy.
38
39 For a more detailed description of the Project see DEIR Chapter 2: Project Description.
40
41
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
1
1 In order to construct the Project, the following are required:
2
3 ■ City Council certification of the EIR;
4 ■ City Council statement of overriding considerations;
5 ■ City Council approval of a Rezoning to Retail Commercial;
6 ■ Planning Commission approval of a Site Development Permit; and
7 ■ City Engineer approval of a Lot Line Adjustment.
8
9 SETTING
10
11 The Project site is located in the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development. The vacant and
12 undeveloped site is comprised of 12 parcels totaling approximately 15.33 acres. The site is
13 covered in grasses with trees located to the east of the site adjacent to Highway 101. The table
14 below includes the General Plan, Zoning and existing land uses for the Project site and
15 surrounding parcels.
16
General Plan Zoning Land Uses
PI'Oj@Ct Master Plan Area (MPA) AIP Planned Development- Vacant and Undeveloped
Site Industrial/Auto Commercial&
Light Manufacturing/Mixed Use
N01th Master Plan Area (MPA) AIP Planned Development-
Industrial/Auto Commercial Ken Fowler Auto Center
Retail Commercial Friedman's Home Improvement,
FoodMaxx,Staples,Walmart
SOUth Master Plan Area (MPA) AIP Planned Development-
Industrial Vacant Parcel
Industrial Mendocino Brewing Company
EdSt N/A N/A Highway 101
N/A N/A County Land
West Master Plan Area (MPA) AIP Planned Development-
Light Manufacturing/Mixed Use Vacant
Public(P) Public Facility(PF) Ukiah Municipal Airport
17
18 BACKGROUND
19
20 Notice of Preparation OF EIR
21 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) advising that an
22 environmental impact report (EIR) was to be prepared for this Project was sent to the State
23 Clearinghouse for distribution to responsible and/or trustee agencies on November 7, 2011.
24 After receiving the NOP, these agencies had 30 days in which to comment on the scope and
25 content of the environmental information related to the specific agency's statutory
26 responsibilities that should be included in the EIR. On November 3, 2011, the NOP was sent to
27 property owners within 300 feet of the Project site and in the Airport Industrial Park Planned
28 Development and posted on the Project site. On November 6, 2011, the NOP was published in
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
2
1 the Ukiah Daily Journal. The review period for the NOP was November 7, 2011 through
2 December 6, 2011. On November 21, 2011, the Planning and Community Development
3 Department held a scoping meeting to take comments on the scope of the EIR. The comments
4 received in response to the NOP are included in DEIR Appendix A. The environmental issues
5 raised in the comment letters include:
6
7 ■ Traffic impacts to the ramps of Highway 101 and State Route 222
8 ■ Cumulative traffic impacts
9 ■ Indirect air emissions
10 ■ Health Risk Analysis for gasoline sales
11 ■ Greenhouse gas emissions
12 ■ Impacts to archeological resources or sacred lands
13 ■ Increase in storm water volumes
14 ■ Increase in storm water pollutants
15 ■ Visual impacts on Highway 101
16 ■ Potential for urban decay within the unincorporated area (County)
17
18 Notice of Availability
19 Once the DEIR is prepared, it must be routed through the State Clearinghouse to all responsible
20 and trustee agencies. These agencies have 45 days in which to comment on the DEIR. At the
21 same time the DEIR is sent to the State Clearinghouse, the public is notified that the DEIR is
22 available for review. This DEIR was sent to the State Clearinghouse and available for public
23 review on January 30, 2013. Notice of Availability of the DEIR was provided as indicated in
24 Public Notice and Comment below.
25
26 Preparation of the EIR
27 The DEIR was prepared by the City's consultant, Environmental Science Associates (ESA) in
28 coordination with City staff. The cost of the EIR, including staff time, is paid by the project
29 applicant/proponent to the City prior to the commencement of work and held in an account. The
3o consultant (ESA) is then paid by the City from this account.
31
32 STAFF ANALYSIS
33
34 Review of the EIR
35 CEQA Guidelines Section 15200 states that the purpose of the review of an EIR includes
36 sharing expertise, disclosing agency analysis, checking for accuracy, detecting omissions,
37 discovering public concerns, and soliciting counter proposals.
38
39 CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 states that the focus of the review of an EIR should be on the
40 sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts of the project on
41 the environment and ways the significant impacts of the project may be mitigated or avoided.
42 The adequacy of the EIR is to be determined based on what is reasonably feasible in light of
43 factors such as the magnitude of the project, the severity of its likely environmental issues, and
44 the geographic scope of the project.
45
46 Section 15204 further states that if persons believe that the project may have a significant effect
47 on the environment, they should 1) identify the specific effect, 2) explain why they believe the
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
3
1 effect would occur, and 3) explain why the effect would be significant. Reviewers should also
2 provide the basis for fheir comments and submit data or references offering facts, reasonab/e
3 assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts to support their comments. In
4 the absence of substantial evidence, an effect shall not be considered significant.
5
6 Format of the EIR
7 The DEIR is separated into the following seven (7) chapters and also includes appendices A-F
8 which are described in Chapter 1 of the DEIR (page 1-4 and 1-5).
9
10 Executive Summary: The Executive Summary provides a brief summary of the Project,
11 identifies the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the DEIR, identifies the areas
12 of controversy identified as part of the EIR scoping process, and lists the project
13 alternatives. Lastly, this section provides a summary table that includes each environmental
14 impact analyzed in the DEIR, the mitigation measure required (if any), and the level of
15 significance after mitigation.
16
17 Chapter 1: Introduction: The Introduction describes the purpose, use, and organization of
18 the EIR, and the process for the preparation, review and certification of the EIR.
19
20 Chapter 2: Project Description: The Project Description provides a detailed description of
21 the proposed Project, including the location and setting, objectives identified by the City and
22 the applicant, and the required approvals and permits.
23
24 Chapter 3: Environmental Settinq, Impacts, and Mitiqation Measures. Environmental
25 Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures analyzes the environmental impacts of the
26 proposed Project and provides mitigation measures where required. The EIR analyzed the
27 potential for the Project to result in impacts to:
28
■ Aesthetics (chapter 3.1) ■ Noise (chapter 3.8)
■ Air Quality(chapter 3.2) ■ Public Services& Utilities (chapter 3.9)
■ Urban Decay(chapter 3.3) ■ Transportation &Traffic(chapter 3.10)
■ Geology& Soils (chapter 3.4) ■ Global Climate Change (chapter 3.11)
■ Hazards & Hazardous Materials (chapter 3.5) ■ Biological Resources (chapter 3.12)
■ Hydrology&Water Quality(section 3.6) • Population & Housing (chapter 3.13)
■ Land Use & Planning (section 3.7) ■ Cultural Resources (section 3.14)
29
30
31 Each chapter includes a Project level and cumulative analysis for the environmental topic
32 that is the subject of that chapter.
33
34 Chapter 4: Other CEQA Considerations: Other CEQA Considerations discusses: the effects
35 found not be significant and, therefore, not discussed in detail in the EIR (Agricultural
36 Resources, Mineral Resources); effects found to be significant and unavoidable (Air Quality
37 Impacts 3.2.2 and 3.2.5; Transportation and Traffic Impacts 3.10.1, 3.10.3, 3.10.4, 3.10.5;
38 and Global Climate Change Impact 3.11.1); significant irreversible effects; cumulative
39 impacts (discussed as part of each environmental topic analyzed in chapter 3); and the
40 Project's potential to result in the inducement of urban growth and development.
41
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
4
1 Chapter 5: Alternatives. Alternatives identifies and describes the alternatives to the Project
2 considered, identifies and analyzes the alternatives to the Project , and compares the
3 environmental impacts of the Project to the alternatives and to each other. This chapter also
4 identifies the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
5
6 Chapter 6: Report Preparers. Report Preparers identifies the agency staff and consultants
7 who prepared the EIR, and the agencies or persons consulted during preparation of the EIR.
8
9 Section 7: List of Acronyms. The List ofAcronyms lists the acronyms used in the EIR in
10 alphabetical order.
11
12 Appendices. The Appendices include the technical reports and data used in the preparation
13 of the EIR and the environmental scoping information. This EIR includes the following
14 appendices.
15
■ Notice of Preparation (NOP)and NOP comment ■ Noise Data (Appendix D)
letters (Appendix A)
■ Air Quality Data (Appendix B) ■ Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix E)
■ Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment(Appendix C) ■ Urban Decay Report(Appendix F)
16
17 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
18 As noted above, Chapter 3 of the DEIR evaluates the potential for the Project to result in an
19 impact to the environment. A potential impact may be found to result in No Impact (NI), Less
20 Than Significant Impact (LTS), Potentially Significant (PS), or Significant and Unavoidable
21 Impact (SU). For a summary of impacts and mitigation measures refer to Table ES-1: Summary
22 of Impacts and Mitigation Measures (pages ES-3 through ES-14).
23
24 Less Than Siqnificant Impacts (LTS). The EIR identified the potential for the Project to result in
25 less than significant environmental impacts to the following.
26
■ Urban Decay(chapter 3.3) ■ Public Services& Utilities (chapter 3.9)
■ Land Use & Planning (chapter 3.7) ■ Population & Housing (chapter 3.13)
■ Noise (chapter 3.8)
27
28 Since the potential impacts were less than significant, no mitigation measures are required.
29
30 Potentiallv Siqnificant Impacts (PS). The EIR identified the potential for the Project to result in
31 potentially significant environmental impacts to the following and identified mitigation measures
32 that would reduce the impact(s) to LTS.
33
■ Aesthetics (chapter 3.1) ■ Hydrology&Water Quality(section 3.6)
■ Geology& Soils (chapter 3.4) ■ Biological Resources (chapter 3.12)
■ Hazards & Hazardous Materials (chapter 3.5) ■ Cultural Resources (section 3.14)
34
35 For each impact identified as PS, the EIR identified mitigation measure(s) that would reduce the
36 impact to LTS. The mitigation measures would be incorporated into and carried out through a
37 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and project conditions of approval.
38
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
5
1 Siqnificant and Unavoidable Impacts (SU). Significant and unavoidable impacts are those
2 impacts that cannot be eliminated or reduced to a less than significant level by the
3 implementation of mitigation measures. The EIR identified the potential for the Project to result
4 in significant and unavoidable impacts to the following.
5
■ Air Quality(chapter 3.2, impacts 3.2.2 and 3.2.5)
■ Transportation &Traffic (chapter 3.10, impacts 3.10.1, 3.10.3, 3.10.4, and 3.10.5)
■ Global Climate Change (chapter 3.11,impact 3.11.1)
6
7 Air Quality. The DEIR identified the following significant and unavoidable impacts related
8 to Air Quality.
9
10 Impact 3.2.2: Operation of the Project would generate significant emissions of criteria air
11 pollutants that could contribute to existing nonattainment conditions and degrade air
12 quality.
13
14 Impact 3.2.5: Construction and operation of the Project would result in cumulatively
15 considerable increases in criteria pollutant emissions.
16
17 Mitigation measures have been identified for the impacts identified above; however, the
18 mitigation measures would not reduce the impacts to LTS (see pages 3.2-14 and 15,
19 mitigation measures 3.2.2a-e and page 3.2-17, mitigation measures 3.2.2 a-d).
20
21 Global Climate Change. The DEIR identified the following significant and unavoidable
22 impact related to Global Climate Change.
23
24 Impact 3.11.1: The Project could generate GHG emissions that may have a significant
25 impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
26 adopted to reduce GHG emissions.
27
28 Mitigation measures have been identified for this impact; however, the mitigation measures
29 would not reduce the impacts to LTS (see pages 3.11-18, mitigation measures 3.2.2a-d).
30
31 Transportation and Traffic. The DEIR identified the following significant and unavoidable
32 impact related to Transportation and Traffic.
33
34 Impact 3.10.1: Implementation of the Project would increase traffic volumes on area
35 roadways.
36
37 Impact 3.10.3: Implementation of the Project would increase traffic volumes on area
38 roadways under Near-Term conditions.
39
40 Impacts 3.10.4: Implementation of the Project would increase traffic volumes on area
41 roadways under Future 2030 conditions.
42
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
6
1 Impact 3.10.5: Under Future Plus Project conditions, traffic associated with the Project
2 would contribute fo inadequafe queuing storage at Talmage Road/Airport Park
3 Boulevard and Talmage Road/US 101 Southbound Off-Ramp.
4
5 Mitigation measures have been identified for the impacts identified above; however, the
6 mitigation measures would not reduce the impacts to LTS (see page 3.10-26, mitigation
7 measure 3.10.1; pages 3.10-32 and 33, mitigation measure 3.10.1; pages 3.10-35 and 36,
8 mitigation measures 3.10.1 and 3.10.4; and page 3.10-37 and 38, mitigation measure
9 3.10.1).
10
11 Separate from the proposed Project, the City has identified the traffic improvements necessary
12 to serve the anticipated future build-out of Airport Industrial Park and has begun preliminary
13 engineering for these improvements. Since the improvements involve modifications to an
14 interchange, Caltrans approval is required. The City has consulted with Caltrans and Caltrans
15 has agreed that there is a need for improvements to the interchange. In addition, preliminary
16 designs of the improvements have been shared and discussed with Caltrans staff. Potential
17 funding sources have also been identified; however, full funding is not guaranteed at this time.
18
19 Project Alternatives
20 DEIR chapter 5 discusses the alternatives to the Project. The DEIR evaluated three alternatives
21 to the proposed project: No Project; Reduced Project Size; and Alternate Project Site. As part
22 of the alternatives analysis, the DEIR evaluated the environmental effects associated with each
23 alternative and compared them with the Project and each other. Table 5-13 provides a
24 summary of the impacts associated with the proposed Project and each of the three alternatives
25 (DEIR page 5-11).
26
27 No Project Alternative. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) requires the DEIR to include an
28 evaluation of the No Project alternative. The No Project Alternative would result in a
29 continuation of the existing conditions on the site in that the site would remain vacant and
3o undeveloped. The No Project Alternative would reduce the impacts for all environmental topics
31 to less than significant levels (LTS).
32
33 The purpose of the No Project Alternative is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of
34 approving the proposed project with the impact of not approving fhe proposed project (CEQA
35 Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(1)).
36
37 Reduced Proiect Size Alternative. Under the Reduced Project Size Alternative, the fueling
38 station would be removed from the Project. The level of environmental impact (LTS, PS, SU)
39 associated with this alternative is summarized below. An indicator(+/-) notes whether the
4o impact of this alternative is comparatively greater(+) or lesser (-)than the impact of the Project.
41
■ Aesthetics PS- ■ Land Use& Planning LTS
■ Air Quality SU- ■ Noise (chapter 3.8) PS
■ Urban Decay LTS- ■ Public Services & Utilities (chapter 3.9) LTS
■ Geology& Soils PS ■ Transportation &Traffic (chapter 3.10) SU-
■ Hazards & Hazardous Materials PS- ■ Global Climate Change (chapter 3.11) SU-
■ Hydrology&Water Quality PS ■ Biological Resources (chapter 3.12) PS
42
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
7
1 Alternate Proiect Site Alternative. Under the Alternate Project Site Alternative, the Project would
2 be located on the west side of Airport Park Boulevard on three parcels totaling approximately
3 14.69 aces. The level of environmental impact (LTS, PS, SU) associated with this alternative is
4 summarized below. An indicator (+/-) notes whether the impact of this alternative is
5 comparatively greater (+) or lesser(-)than the impact of the Project.
6
■ Aesthetics PS- ■ Land Use & Planning PS+
■ Air Quality SU ■ Noise (chapter 3.8) PS+
■ Urban Decay LTS ■ Public Services & Utilities (chapter 3.9) LTS
■ Geology& Soils PS ■ Transportation &Traffic (chapter 3.10) SU
■ Hazards & Hazardous Materials PS+ ■ Global Climate Change (chapter 3.11) SU
■ Hydrology&Water Quality PS ■ Biological Resources (chapter 3.12) PS
7
8 Environmentally Superior Alternative. CEQA requires that the EIR identify an environmentally
9 superior alternative. Since the No Project Alternative would reduce the impact to all
10 environmental topics to less than significant, the No Project Alternative has been identified as
11 the environmentally superior alternative.
12
13 When the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project alternative, CEQA requires a
14 second alternative be selected. In this case, the Reduced Project Size Alternative (Project
15 without fuel station) has been identified as the environmentally superior alternative. This
16 alternative would reduce, although not avoid, impacts to Aesthetics, Air Quality, Urban Decay,
17 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Transportation and Traffic, and Global Climate Change.
18
19 PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT
20
21 A Notice of Availability of the DEIR and the Planning Commission public hearing was provided
22 in the following manner:
23
24 ■ filed with the Mendocino County Clerk for posting on January 28, 2013;
25 ■ published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on January 27, 2013;
26 ■ posted in the locations on the Project site on January 28, 2013;
27 ■ mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject parcel, property owners within
28 Airport Industrial Park Planned Development , and tenants on parcels contiguous to the
29 subject parcel on January 28, 2013;
30 ■ mailed and/or emailed to all persons on the Costco interested parties list on January 28,
31 2013;
32 ■ posted on the City of Ukiah website on January 28, 2013; and
33 ■ posted in the glass notice case at the Civic Center on January 28, 2013.
34
35 As of January 30, 2013, copies of the DEIR and appendices have been available for review at
36 the following locations:
37
Main Branch Library City of Ukiah
105 North Main Street Planning & Community Development Dept.
Ukiah, CA 95482 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
8
City of Ukiah website
Draft EIR at https://cityofukiah.box.com/drafteir
Draft Appendices at https://cityofukiah.box.com/CostcoDElRAppendices
1
2 As of the writing of this staff report, no written correspondence has been received regarding the
3 DEIR. The written correspondence received to date regarding the EIR is included in Appendix
4 A of the DEIR (Notice of Preparation and Comment Letters).
5
6 CONCLUSION
7
8 The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public and Planning Commission comment on
9 the Draft Environment Impact Report for the proposed Costco Project. The following is a
10 summary of next steps in the process:
11
12 ■ Completion of comment period on the Draft EIR (ends March 15, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.);
13 ■ Preparation of the Final EIR (including responses to comments);
14 ■ Planning Commission review and recommendation to City Council for EIR certification;
15 ■ City Council review and consideration of certification of the EIR;
16 ■ City Council review and consideration of rezoning and statement of overriding
17 considerations;
18 ■ Planning Commission review and consideration of Site Development Permit; and
19 ■ City Engineer review of Lot Line Adjustment.
20
21 Staff requests the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to receive testimony on the
22 adequacy of the draft environmental impact report for the Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station
23 project.
24
25
26
27
28
29 ATTACHMENTS
30
31 1. Draft Environmental Impact Report with Appendices (hand delivered to Planning
32 Commission on February 1, 2013 and posted to home page of the City of Ukiah website
33 on January 30, 2013 at www.cityofukiah.com)
34
35
36
37
38 S:Planning/Planning Commission/Staff Reports/Costco/DEIR 02272013
39
Costco Warehouse and Fuel Station Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)
South end Airport Park Boulevard
APNs:180-110-08,09,and10;180-080-57,58,59,and 62-67
File Nos.:File Nos.:11-01-REZ-SDP-LLA-CC-PC-CE and 11-16-EIR-CC
9
Costco Wholesale Pro ' ect
J
Draft Environmental I m act Re ort
p p
City of Ukiah
Planning & Community Development Department
February 27, 2013
Cit ia�i � ESA
�
J
Topics
• Background
• The Proposed Project
• Summary of the Draft EIR
• N ext Ste ps
• Comments
Backg rou nd
• Project: Costco Wholesale Project
• Location : Airport Park Blvd .
• Applicant: David Babcock & Associates
• Notice of Preparation — November 7, 2011
- Scoping Meeting held November 21 , 2011
- Six scoping comment letters received
• Draft EIR published January 30, 2013
• Review Period ends March 15, 2013
The Proposed Project
• Location
- Airport Park Blvd.
- Project site is bounded by commercial uses (north and
south), U.S. 101 (east), and Airport Park Boulevard
(west).
- The site is within the Airport Industrial Park (AIP)
Planned Development. The Airport Industrial Park is
bounded by Talmage Road to the north, Ukiah Municipal
Airport to the west, and U.S. 101 to the east and south.
- Portions of twelve parcels totaling 15.33 acres.
/
�� i
,/MENCOCiNe
� COLNTY
l
�- �I �
�A
N
N UKIAH
» Tai
m
aee Roaa �..
1° -��� Talmage
PROJECiL4CATION��� �.A
y
a^p '
/�yg tOt
� �
�
� A I
"
�
\
�
,a ..� 2 �. '�
�
ns i��; �
+h�� ro ' �^ �„�a
� � �+�J. �i a � „ ����
,. ��,. n"�„+�'�,,��. � .,� �
�ti��� ' �' �` txit� �L�� a Ta� t'm�+ +�� � � � � ��� � ��
9 h
'ti`y����P *t°� � � e` �t���"� t�#� . . � � � k`�R �z � '4
a� �` j�� a�t � ;, 1�.i���"�q,� � �, ; � 1 zzs
�
�;s `
�,�,� ykat r �� `wh �H,r}� � �� �'` sm� � ,. .
k � y k'rc=t M � ..v �^U�.
4 '.'� �. v *�:� :, �\� ��" � d �* ' ,:� ��
�r �a,�F �, va.� * " i �c�
4 �+ �`" . '�a �`S?�.°y � � , t ,+`�
,'' �:` S �3w:�a a �'�,
°,frµ," . '�„ �?, t `S� � �?�s ;
,> ,..,.
�„ � ,t � s � ti3 z ',y a' k��',c
� v r t 3
�l� ���.my. �,:t �� '� tl as t s lt�Zt�
� 3 s � t s
c! � 1. y� rr t
ai,� 5�l
w� Rt 1�`lta"a�N� 1 fj ��S �
�p 'mP 1 3' �4 .� }� ;f tj � :
Yt�,�"v .���N 1 �� � '"�`3±'�: t�t ' �r � .�.
�c rrt x 9 0;� o
`�a� i� �`t � :Psr ;� 1a9 �.. , ,.q ,,
��y � �i��� 'y a � � r � � J,`
" '�+ � it. a�.,a, rr . � �.
��� � � � { � � � ���
ztW � �! 3 L Y
r �.v n�� � � ?,� y;�`. s s '.. t �
qiYx'� ,, �� ro� ,.5 �� sii P <b'E�•i[ I..= O I6N :
wdc:�.is� 1� .
y `` .�.� "�`.� zt z�`, �: ��, �t s., ' 3 ;, ti :
�'i53� � Uk h� S f ) l�
':A- . M OiC Val ^-� �t it
j � }
� A oPO t ��d� t i N��� YS � "
. ': y "�.'� ( ) 3 t F S i °
�v� R` „3 � 5 Y l �g � i�Lt � „ '�
fi � � � y j �yti � F �{4IS �
p �i k � '�,.YY�?,k `atl4 }.�'.
@� w ^y �`�'e s� `11�. '�"�`,� ?'Yy.� �5y t ,
������� i�"` � , � � � s. � t i i.
'f'.#R . � �`Y Ak�'F l 3 ��v,9 'y 4
�L '� .�M4" ,� Ai�,' �.i�"v�.@� x
„ <v t 5
�h, � �� � �` �i .��s � }y�r�
�4§ r �.� 4 0 1ti
t � �' " �rt 1 Ze,� �, ti �
�3 t 75 t ��� n�� it ly ��tw'���� �tt�� tE� � tV�'.����� .
„� �1y?a *:r�.1,,�.�?n3 s `�� i � >i�t i � a �fi s��
i fi � ''�����;a��s �, �,�'�a �4 �i �t� � `�si2s � �i .
�'�"iX t a i�y�� 5���� � � + t �(�1 �� �SV���5� x ��Y
�4��Y� �', wm �� � �'�' �* t� 1�,3 S�� � �j "�� t d1k t i �� r"t�)�� t���`{���'��
N + z;.�,c� � § i''�S� 1� i#F�t�� �ti Y �� � �£�2�� Sir�`i a
> ��S *N .�} +,, n 1 ���� C �j�� tt �tl��4 ����j�
� tg,� a»t� � 'Y SY�tt «. ��4��i�t �� � h�tlS����,�, i\� i �
a ix {` $' � � s �`���iSs� �� �$�� ya y�i`�3;�i��`����'z.���l4�e.s �!
t xz , i � � �r}� �
,��'\. , a x e���`�` �Y* a���` �', t��i ��'a� �2 � '� ��m � `�cyi �
q�� r � �� $ : l; ���� it s r � ?
�"i"�` y�,.�b�`k���� "s'l'�'.�+e��� Yag�.1�` �mi' � a��' ����, �n � i000
� ; bi ��j ii tl 3��v�6".y`+''� y �4� a�'1Y�� � y s
�,��. y� � ,T, reat
� x'i"� �.�2�'�@�1.e`w"^'.�,..�,i.°�.a ! Y�l+kn4?t^.i :.� , ..�..,_.,��., .� i..:. • A __.
The Proposed Project
• Description
The Project consists of the construction of a Costco
Wholesale warehouse and fuel station in Ukiah,
California. The EIR analyzes a maximum warehouse
size of 148,000 square feet and a fuel facility of up to 20
pumps on a 15.33-acre site. The proposed Costco
warehouse would include a bakery, pharmacy, optical
center, hearing aid testing center, food court, photo
center, tire center, and fuel station, along with the sales
of 3,800 to 4,000 retail products. The tire center would
be a 5,692 square-foot attached building with member
access through the inside of the main Costco building
and would include retail tire sales and a tire installation
facility. The fuel station, located in the southeast corner
of the site, would have 16 stations initially (and an option
to expand to 20 stations) and a 2,816 square-foot
canopy. The Costco facility will employ approximately
175 to 200 people.
•
I ♦ I � I � � I
• - .
- - - -- r-: -� Y• •. .•.�-:# <:.� �-� '.,� —. .�.�-,=_�: ...�,. H
"$L�j'��*o.s1�� ..��'il..'Lb.,il.', VYF�i .Wr�.'.IYu.��.ti.��^L�i +
'.iif }rY"o�
� �� .�y ..
'.:'. 1�'°�,J.�
q�v
� ��t� _�k� .��� 4 e%��
, .F �y ' ^�14n 1 ti�"r'.yy'�
�� ''y S°++�eT�
:4° +p ti,��
y ,�
- � ,. / � � -.A�q'
-t"'G\' i
. 'f^3 .�* �A
. fl., ,sy hA�
�. ,�n_ _ _ _ .xy 7n.
ati ,+,v _ J� ��
J
� - . l.ry
!�• '�� `i.
�•'!
�7�
'�' "S. r
� �. .S�'."ti.� ��m�.s � �...�. :s.��.w �_ °L =�� � '` -
� ..�^ � '':FJ� �i7 '•'�J h i�•A
�Y2,fiM �
�� 1
�1'Y ����/ '�j' 'Six 'A: rsi -Y
.... . '\0i` .� -�` i
_ - - ...Vr i1 - :��M — '��� �
Y r "
` !
k.LV..y� '�� - � . ' � �
'`�� +;�- � ' ' � ' ' ' ' _ ' �
•�'' �. .�.,�.c2. ..a1. ..ad..._J. ' _ _ ' _
Preliminary Elevations
� �� .�
��.. _____ �v
�a�-, , , i �-.:,.�
�r� - � i
�a —
EAST ELEVATIDN
�
ii-"�'a _ �,� �a......� o� � �aA'
__ :.I f Ii � �� ", � � ����.,,,
Ii i II
ENTRY ELEVATInN Sfll1TN ELEVATIdH �
�._�
�� �. � ,� �'� � � ,
' ; , i � �;
�
WEST ELEVAFIQN l '� ` �`�� ,
��.�...... �w�a«,�,.. �x.��,..,. x_�.p.,. i� - s�:: -
— . — . � �
�,��,., � �;.,,..� � �a.. :..�
�
i
I � I I '
NORTH ELEVATION
Entitlements
• A zoning amendment to rezone the parcels to
Retail Commercial ;
• A site development permit; and
• A lot line adjustment to consolidate the existing
parcels into two parcels.
Scope of the E I R
• Aesthetics* • Land Use
• Air Quality** • Noise
• Urban Decay • Public Services & Utilities
• Geology & Soils* • Transportation & Traffic**
• Hazards and Hazardous • Global Climate Change**
. *
Materials • Biological Resources*
• Hydrology & Water • Population & Housing
Quality* • Cultural Resources*
* Potentially Significant
** Significant & Unavoidable
Less than Significant Impacts
• Land Use
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Urban Decay
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Aesthetics
— 3. 1 .2 New source of light or glare (night time)
• Full cut-off lighting, LEED or Green Globe standards
• Geology and Soils
— 3.4. 1 Seismic damage
• Prepare design-level geotechnical report and
incorporate recommendations into civil and structural
plans
— 3.4.3 Potential soil instability
• Mitigation per impact 3.4. 1
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Hazards / Hazardous Materials
- 3.5.2 Potential to encounter contamination during
construction
• Halt construction and coordinate remediation with
appropriate oversight agency
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Hydrology and Water Quality
- 3.6.2 Potential dewatering and water quality impacts
• Incorporate NPDES and WDR requirements if
dewatering is required
- 3.6.4 Effects to stormwater due to increase in
impervious surFace
• Prepare drainage report for City and regional water
quality control board to confirm runoff,
retention/detention capacity, and best management
practices
- 3.6.8 Cumulative water quality effects (Russian River
watershed)
• Mitigation per impact 3.6.4
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Traffic and Circulation
— 3. 10.2 Potential conflicts with transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian policies, plans and programs
• Provide transit stop location
• Implement pedestrian improvements including
sidewalks, crosswalks, ADA compliant ramps, and
on-site connections
• Implement bicycle improvements
• Class III route on Airport Park Blvd.
• On-site bicycle parking
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Biological Resources
- 3. 12. 1 Impacts to nesting birds
• Preconstruction surveys and avoidance methods
• Cultural Resources
- 3. 14.2 Accidental disturbance of archaeological or
paleontological resources
• Halt construction, evaluation by qualified personnel
Potentially Significant Impacts
• Cultural Resources
- 3. 14.2 Accidental disturbance of archaeological or
paleontological resources
• Halt construction, evaluation by qualified personnel
- 3. 14.3 Accidental disturbance of previously unidentified
human remains
• Halt construction, evaluation by qualified personnel
Significant & Unavoidable Impacts
• Air Quality
— 3.2.2 Operational impacts to air quality (NOx, PM 10,
PM2.5)
• Incorporate sustainability features into building
• Increase opportunities for carpool/vanpool, transit,
bike, and pedestrian access
• Use low VOC architectural coatings
— 3.2.5 Cumulative air quality impacts (due to non-
attainment status of air basin)
Significant & Unavoidable Impacts
• Traffic and Circulation
— 3. 10. 1 Increased traffic volumes (Talmage Road/Airport
Park Blvd.) (significant & unavoidable)
• Construct Talmage Road Interchange Improvements,
including two left-turn lanes WB Talmage
— 3. 10.3 Increased traffic volumes on area roadways
under Near-Term conditions (significant & unavoidable)
• Mitigation per impact 3. 10. 1
— 3. 10.4 Increased traffic volumes under Future (2030)
conditions (significant & unavoidable)
• Mitigation per Impact 3. 10.4
• Install left turn lane on EB Washington/Hastings at S.
State Street
Significant & Unavoidable Impacts
• Global Climate Change
- 3. 11 . 1 Increased GHG Emissions
• Mitigation per Impact 3.2.2 (sustainability features)
Project Alternatives
• No Project (No Build)
• Reduced Size Alternative (No Fuel Station)
• Off-Site Location Alternative (West Side)
• Other alternatives considered
— Off-site Location — N . Orchard Ave.
N ext Ste ps
� DEIR comment period ends March 15 (5:00 pm)
� Preparation of Final EIR including responses to comments
� Planning Commission review and recommendation to City
Council on certification of Final EIR and proposed rezoning
� City Council review and consideration of
1 . Certification of Final EIR
2. Rezoning (and statement of overriding considerations)
� Planning Commission review and consideration of Site
Development Permit
� City Engineer review of Lot Line Adjustment
Comments
Urban Decay
• Definition
— Physical deterioration to properties or structures that is
so prevalent, substantial, and lasting for a significant
period of time that it impairs the proper utilization of the
properties and structures, and the health, safety, and
welfare of the surrounding community.
• Analysis Outline
— Market Area: Primary and secondary
— Potential sales shift within market area
— Potential for closure of competing retailers
— Potential for re-use of vacant retail space
— Potential for physical decay
Urban Decay
• M a rket Area
— Mendocino County & portions of Lake County
— $1 .6 billion market area sales base
• Potential Sales Shift
— $113.8M project sales ($120M tax included)
— 85/15 percent retail vs. wholesale split
— 85/15 in-market vs. out-of-market sales
— Recapture of Ukiah sales "leakage" $40.5M
— Sales shift of $46.7M
— Grocery sector $31 .4M (6.4% of market area sales)
Urban Decay
• Competing Retailers
- Walmart, Food Maxx (Ukiah)
- Lucky, Grocery Outlet (Ukiah)
- Ray's Food (Willits), Grocery Outlet (Lakeport)
• Re-Use
- Past successes (Kmart>Home Depot; Mervyn's>Kohl's)
- Land Use Flexibility
- Remaining Leakge (retail opportunities)
s ! ' ..0.'� �n
M1# f i 17;. . ' I '. �I i5 ��.
�a.!. ���l '��•� �� Y , t_,j ��, �
�� . � u��� "�t ,_ }� �++4, w�aS'�'4. �L'
. ' .}_,�r" �� k' '
� ;�. � *�:`rti.:. �.�'
i '� y� •-
t � ��Sg �f „�� � -
��, � -.,, - -
`��.yry z ` ,;' ,':':_ '
�s�!- �'�`_' ! •ax • ° r
;i�r i _ p2 e�1�* - ',�
� ��
'���'� -.�r� .�4 '�-;
,� 'r�.`. r�r'I�
.�}.:�.`�r�.ii ' � `Y�'``1� ��k �
��; h'l,(�4�k �,
'.�' ��� ''� - �
. } �.
xa N
'.�'� r�i� w� * i , •
��+�.^ ��_ �`� �4�.
'¢r � �
'#'�'r ��t.f'y.�+?�. 3
.r M`�. i� 1 .a'� . A+ , r" � •
3� �;:�J'�. M.�M .k '"' �M$r -r-+t
k"' � � R� 'L.yv!?,. i.'' IT4���c: `� .���'w,����.I
'" ` =f� ,��`�ri� _ ,i-�' I F
�. �, -t �
�r fi ' � .--r a I1;3^�' '�� � I. � �311
i� '�' ?l � � �}�- 'y��� '.i E�� ''�► 7
{ � � ...__ r�� .ti;` �; �J.-
� .�Y '�...; ��� { ..
.�-- ;r- �,p .",�'� ' ;p� � -
2g�[�{4 nA,reiSiy. '' �x�' s ing ,AG� ati ��L5� �7f�
�.� ' .�n�Ri i`Y�� I'� �1 ����-;
tif � 1
�� t rr}r.c �,2rc -r �f:�# .N t�n���
�'` 4
I -
� s .-�
� �y �.
r r._�,'�
��;,L f' a
a M. � 's�<MNr
,� � ��' �'
.1.,u, �
�.T.7••
rr. � p�rt
� � '�❑ Sate
��� �,�� �,�'}
:o ;
* � i '�.�� ��4��.
.�
� � '. -
I nterchange M itigation
F- �. - � r r. w - i
� � f,` . � I�f �
r { � � �
�: � f � ' � �� � ' I o
� r � � ` �- # f!{ r � � I
�. � �`` . � .�;f �
� �,4�1 � � � ��' ' ���I
�.�.��� � �; , �± �` { :� � , �t ' I
r _^ � , ��� �
_ ' � ,: —� � -� �* �� �
_- .�� .y, A• � I
' - " �. ' ' R�.R� ���{ 4
y�y- " ` {— ' i .---. - - - - - � - -
.. -_ ___4}�: _---=--� - - � - -__ -� -
� ` �
� ; ` _ }_ _ _ . _. �_
+� • . � �tn,sge Ro���. Ij�`� `�� � .•�I
. ,i�i, , , � � � � �
, ; ';, � i� il .�� � �� .�
,- ,,
'I', , � II I� , '� �'� � ,1 : ,
� �� �� � � �� �� � I f� . I
.I � i. , � t.
j I � • �� � + +. �; I
� , . . , � �� �� � I�
i� .
;, �i �: , I� �� .� � ;,
� i� , �� � 'llil I � �� *��K� I '
� ���� , �r ' - . • �f� �.�kt + /r:
� . ' I 3• r. . ��
�; � � � �
. � � I�, � " "z � y �M14��_____- r '��#.," f
1 � ti*'x �� � i
• �I � ■ ..\ - - -'_
r � x, 'r t
{r i ��i' �. ' '.* ' �'+;. 4,�� � ' � � .
� '
I V� +- �
�� I� Q:.i � 7.f y�
, ' �� � . ' � I�.i't-.�'•
i i , , . - �#��
`I I • �, . � �
.. r .\
.i I �� r. �'�
�
�
.I ,{ r r � . �