HomeMy WebLinkAbout05222013 - packet CITY OF UKIAH
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Wednesday May 22, 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 April 10, 2013 meetings are included for review and approval.
The minutes from the April 24 and May 8, 2013 meetings will be available for review at
the June 12, 2013 meeting.
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
party 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. For items on this agenda, the
appeal must be received by 7une 3, 2013 at 5:00 p.m.
7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE
9. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project, 116 South State
Street (File No.: 13-11-MP-PC). Planning Commission consideration and possible
action on a Mural Permit to allow the installation of three murals at 116 South State
Street, APN 002-226-08. The murals are a senior project for students of the AP
English Literature class at Ukiah High School
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.
B. B and B Warehouse Expansion, 923 Mazzoni Street (File No.:13-10-SDP-
PC). Planning Commission consideration and possible action on a Site Development
Permit to allow the construction of a 5,600 square foot addition to an existing
warehouse building at 923 Mazzoni Street, APN 002-040-37.
10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
12. 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 April 10, 2013
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Kevin Doble Mike Whetzel
7 Linda Sanders Judy Pruden, Chair
8 Laura Christensen
9
10 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
11 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
12 Greg Owen, Airport Manager
13 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
14
15 1. CALL TO ORDER
16 Chair Pruden and Vice Chair Whetzel were absent. The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning
17 Commission was called to order by Senior Planner Jordan at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
18 Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
19
20 2. ROLL CALL
21
22 Senior Planner Jordan suggested the Commissioners appoint an acting chair or ask for a volunteer
23 since there was no chair or vice chair present to conduct the meeting.
24
25 Commissioner poble volunteered to serve as acting chair.
26
27 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
28
29 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes from the March 27, 2013 are included for review and
30 approval.
31
32 M/S Sanders/Christensen to approve the March 27, 2013 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried (3-0)
33 with Chair Pruden and Commissioner Whetzel absent.
34
35 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
36
37 6. APPEAL PROCESS
38
39 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commissioners
40
41 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by Staff
42
43 9. PUBLIC HEARING
44 9A. Ukiah Municipal Airport Zoning Map Amendment and Establishment of Planned
45 Development Regulations. Planning Commission consideration and possible recommendation
46 to City Council for a Zoning Map Amendment to change the zoning of the parcels located at the
47 Ukiah Municipal Airport from Public Facilities (PF) and Manufacturing (M) to Planned
48 Development— Public Facilities (PD-PF) and to establish Planned Development Regulations and
49 a Planned Development Map for the Ukiah Municipal Airport.
50
51 Senior Planner Jordan: Gave a staff report and noted no development and no expansion of the Airport
52 are proposed as part of the proposed rezoning and establishment of PD Zoning District Regulations. All
53 development is subject to the standards and process prescribed as part of the proposed Ukiah Municipal
54 Airport Planned Development.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 1
1 Commissioner Sanders:
2 • The environmental documents prepared for the Walmart Expansion Project and Costco Project
3 included an EPR Radius Map Report and Geotech information indicated there is contamination
4 on the Airport. Asked staff to comment on this.
5
6 Senior Planner Jordan:
7 • The State Water Resources Board 'Geotracker' website identifies sites with contamination and
8 their status.
9 • Confirmed there is one site on the Airport, City's corporation yard, that is `open and under
10 remediation.' The estimated timeframe for cleanup is five years and the City is approximately one
11 year into this cleanup.
12 • The direction of the groundwater movement runs to the southeast. To provide an example, the
13 new Sears building was affected by contamination and dealt with this as part of construction of
14 the building. The new US Cellular building located east of the Sears building was not affected by
15 any contamination.
16 • Monitoring wells are set up to test groundwater migration from known contaminated sites and are
17 shown on the Geotracker website.
18 • Demonstrated other areas on the Geotracker map that have been cited as being contaminated,
19 what sites are closed and/or open sites that are under remediation and where the monitoring
20 wells are located.
21
22 Airport Manager Owen:
23 • The City Corporation Yard is located in the Eastside North, Subarea 2.
24 • The Airport is required to follow environmental regulations and participates in a State Stormwater
25 Monitoring Program. During the wet season the Airport is required to provide outfall monitoring of
26 water that does include water sampling.
27 • The Airport must make sure water leaving the Airport is clean and that the Airport is not
28 discharging any contaminated water.
29 • The Airport even during the dry season has water in the storm drains and is required to find out
30 where this water is coming from.
31
32 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:10 p.m.
33
34 Don Albright, Airport Commission Chair:
35 • The Airport Commission worked diligently for 18 months to revise the Ukiah Municipal Airport
36 Guidelines adopted by Council to create a document that more appropriately ensures the
37 development of the Airport occurs in a manner consistent with the development standards, land
38 uses, and that the procedures included in the document are enforceable and implementable.
39 During this process, high consideration was given to present Airport operations and how future
40 operations and development can best be accomplished in order to promote/enhance/reserve the
41 economic vitality of the Airport.
42 • Recently, the Airport Commission was asked to consider and review the proposed Ukiah Airport
43 Planned Development (PD) Regulations and associated Planned Development Planning Areas
44 Map in which some revisions were recommended, as addressed in the staff report.
45 • Of primary concern during the 18-month discussion and revision of the Guideline document was
46 to ensure safety at the Airport. The Airport functions with fixed-wing aircraft and rotocraft having
47 the potential to conflict with one another. As such, the Commission spent considerable time
48 establishing/looking at areas/subareas where the different types of aircraft can best operate
49 safely. Considerable time and thought was also given to future development and identification of
50 land uses for the different planning areas that would be allowed by right, allowed with a use
51 permit or prohibited to best benefit the Airport. The Commission focused very closely on whether
52 or not a use was right/compatible for a particular area.
53 • Supports the rezoning of Airport parcels that comprise the Ukiah Municipal Airport from Public
54 Facilities (PF) and Manufacturing (M) to Planning Development (PD) — Public Facilities (PD-PF)
55 and approval of the associated PD Regulations and PD Planning Areas Map.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 2
1 Eric Crane, Airport Commissioner:
2 • The intent of the Guideline document was to make certain it reflects the historical use of the
3 Airport facility and found the former Guidelines document had little or no resemblance in this
4 regard and/or how the Airport actually functions. It was `sort of a second document away from
5 reality.'
6 • The Commission began the process of revising the Guideline document by describing how the
7 Airport is used and how it is intended to be used moving forward.
8 • The entire east side of the Airport facility is not currently beneficial for aviation with the exception
9 of the fuel tanks. Portions of the east side are used seasonally by agencies/organizations that are
10 involved with marijuana eradication and use helicopters. As this area is hopefully developed,
11 would like to take some of the less compatible uses in other areas and transfer them to the east
12 side, particularly helicopter operations.
13 • The intent of the Guideline document presently proposed as PD Regulations was to
14 evaluate/discuss what operations/facilities the Airport currently has and what the needs/plans are
15 for the future.
16
17 Acting Chair poble:
18 • Understands and appreciates how hard the Airport Commission worked on the Guideline
19 document.
20 • Page 10, Table 1: Eastside Uses and Permit Requirements, Professional offices — Aviation
21 related and Professional offices — non aviation related and questioned why the use differential for
22 aviation related and non-aviation related activities for professional office?
23 • Also, the warehouse and distribution use provided for in the adopted guideline document was not
24 included in the revised guideline document and/or proposed PD Regulation document. Asked
25 why this is?
26
27 Eric Crane:
28 • The intent with regard to Professional Office and separating aviation related from non-aviation
29 related involved a discussion and analysis of `what if.' In the best interest of the Airport the intent
30 for aviation related uses for professional office is they be allowed by right in the appropriate
31 designated planning area and non-aviation related uses for professional office require a use
32 permit in the appropriate designated zones and this is because the uses should be related to
33 Airport functions/activities to make certain the Airport has a future. Therefore, the preference is
34 for uses to be aviation-related.
35 • Related to warehouse and distribution uses, the intent is to discourage someone from building a
36 warehouse that would be used as such. On the other hand, if someone wanted to construct a
37 building that could be used for aircraft in the future, but the demand at this time was for a
38 warehouse more thought would be given as to how this would transition in the future.
39
40 Acting Chair poble:
41 • Related to warehouse and distribution use, what about a product such as wine that is
42 manufactured somewhere else but a space for distribution is needed and the interest for this
43 space happens to be on the Airport?
44
45 Eric Crane:
46 • If the product is not being distributed by air, the preference would be to have distribution
47 elsewhere because the use does not involve aviation. There are many areas where a building
48 can be constructed for warehouse and distribution purposes. There are very few places where a
49 building can be constructed to accommodate aircraft.
50 • The intent is to discourage those uses that can be done elsewhere.
51 • Available space is somewhat limited at the Airport. The concern is that the building would be
52 used for a non-aviation related purpose which would displace the ability to have a hangar
53 constructed.
54 • The Airport is a City facility and corresponding enterprise fund where construction of a hangar or
55 any type of construction must be at prevailing wage. This is very expensive per square foot. The
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 3
1 Airport does not have the cash flow to really fund the building of hangars so it important hangars
2 be preserved for aviation related uses and that available space for any type of construction be
3 reserved for aviation related uses as well.
4 • The FED-EX building is a land lease (ground lease) situation. The land is owned by the Airport
5 and the building is owned by FED-EX, but at some point when the lease expires and/or is not
6 renewed, the building would revert to Airport ownership. The building could be leased back to
7 FED-EX or to someone else. When the FED-EX building was initially designed, it did not include
8 the ability to house aircraft. At that time in the 1990s, the Airport Commission said since the
9 structure would be located on the flight line the structure must be built to accommodate aircraft.
10 FED-EX does use the building to store aircraft and does distribute by air.
11 • If someone wants to store wine, for instance, and is willing to build a structure for the City and it is
12 built to include a door that can accommodate aircraft, the Airport would be fine with leasing
13 ground for this purpose because at some point, the building will revert to City ownership.
14 • People desiring to construct a building at the Airport must consider whether or not they want to
15 make a significant financial investment in a building when at some point the building will revert to
16 Airport ownership.
17
18 Acting Chair poble:
19 • Understands the Airport does not necessarily want to discourage warehouse and distribution
20 uses per se, but rather require a structure be built to accommodate aircraft for future use even
21 though the immediate and/or intended use would be for warehousing and distribution purposes.
22 The Airport would like to have some oversight/authority about how the aforementioned scenario
23 would be implemented.
24
25 Eric Crane:
26 • The Airport does not want warehouse and distribution to be a use allowed by right. A use that
27 best benefits the Airport is one that is aviation related or has an aviation related use component
28 for future use as an aviation related use.
29
30 Staff:
31 • To explain how a warehousing and distribution use could occur at the Airport. If a use is
32 proposed that is not listed in the use tables or for some other reason/exception, a request for
33 Determination of Appropriate use could be requested. This request would be referred to the
34 Airport Manager and scheduled for consideration by the Airport Commission. The Airport
35 Manager and Planning Director would determine if the use was appropriate at the Airport and, if
36 so, make the required findings supporting the Determination.
37 • The requirement that the Determination be reviewed by the Airport Commission was added at the
38 April 2, 2013 meeting to allow the Commission to consider and have input on uses that are not
39 listed in the table and their ability to benefit the Airport or not.
40 • The Airport Commission spent considerable time reviewing and determining the uses that should
41 occur and the uses should be encouraged at the Airport. Typically, aviation uses that support the
42 Airport and should be encouraged were allowed by right. Uses that were non-aviation related
43 and may not be the best use of limited Airport resources require a Use Permit.
44
45 Acting Chair poble:
46 • How would a restaurant apply to specific uses? For restaurants, Table 1: Eastside Uses and
47 Permit Requirements require a use permit for Eastside North, Subarea 1 and 2, but prohibited in
48 Eastside North, Subarea 3, Eastside South, Subarea 1 and 2; For restaurants, Table 2: Westside
49 Uses and Permit Requirements, a use permit is required for Westside North, is allowed by right
50 in Westside Central, prohibited in Westside South and allowed with a use permit in Westside
51 Mixed South/Central.
52 • Would the public use a restaurant that is on an airport?
53
54 Eric Crane:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 4
1 • How restaurants work for airports is pilots fly to an airport for lunch. It is called the $100
2 hamburger.
3 • Restaurants located near airfields attract transient aircraft. It is not about the airport, but rather
4 the pilots.
5 • The public could also use a restaurant located on the airport, particularly if people can dine and
6 watch planes come and go with a commanding view of the flight line. This is the case in at many
7 airports, including Petaluma.
8
9 Commissioner Sanders:
10 • Sees that Community Gardens related to Table 1: Eastside Uses and Permit Requirements are
11 prohibited in Eastside North, Subareas 1, 2, & 3, allowed with approval of a use permit in
12 Eastside South, Subarea 1 and prohibited in Eastside South, Subarea 2. Table 2: Westside Uses
13 and Permit Requirements, prohibited in Westside North, Central, South and Westside Mixed
14 South/Central and inquired about the reason they are discouraged?
15 • Table 1, page 10, picnic area/primitive parking and requested information more about this use.
16 According to the table this use is prohibited in Eastside North Subareas 1, 2, & 3 and requires
17 use permit approval to operate in Eastside South, Subareas 1 and 2. Also, questioned the reason
18 for the note that states, `only when allowed by FAA.'
19
20 Eric Crane:
21 • Someone specifically came to the Airport Commission and asked that the Commission consider
22 allowing gardens at the Airport.
23 • The Airport Commission had several discussions about a proposed Community Gardens at the
24 Airport and it was determined there was no real suitable location other than possibly Eastside
25 South, Subarea 1 because some aircraft still use lead fuel and this would not be a healthy
26 approach to grow food in possible contaminated soil. Other issues included problems with having
27 water that is easily accessible for the garden and/or other issues such as safety associated with
28 garden activities and people working in the vicinity of aircraft.
29 • Related to `Picnic area/Primitive parking, after the September 11 tragedy there was a big push to
30 fence airports and with keeping the public off of property and places where airplanes operate.
31 There was also some discussion about not allowing camping at rural airports and with airports
32 having more security precautionary measures in place. Related to the note, `only when allowed
33 by FAA' acknowledges this is the environment associated with picnic/primitive parking use so that
34 if the FAA says something about this use, it is documented the Airport must appeal to a higher
35 authority. The Airport Commission determined Eastside South, Subareas 1 and 2 would be
36 suitable for use as a picnic area and/or for primitive parking (camping).
37
38 Duell Parks:
39 • Is a pilot of both helicopters and fixed wing aircraft.
40 • Has questions concerning the proposed PD Regulation document as it relates to rotocraft and
41 fixed wing aircraft uses and locations.
42 • It will be a long time before rotocraft uses are permanently relocated to the east side of the
43 Airport.
44 • Acknowledged there are times when pilots that operate helicopters and fixed wing aircraft
45 miscommunicate and this becomes a safety issue. Supports the Airport look closely at the uses
46 and locations for rotocraft and fixed wing aircraft operations to make certain such aircraft do not
47 conflict by operating in close proximity with one another.
48
49 Airport Manager Owen:
50 • The way it is now rotocraft uses are still allowed in the Westside until which time the east side can
51 be developed with the proper infrastructure to accommodate a helipad and helicopters.
52 • The Airport is in the process of looking at FAA grant funding for a study to look at potential
53 development of the east side of the Airport relative to compatibility and future funding to develop
54 the east side.
55 • It will take time to develop a plan and a design for potential development of the east side.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 5
1 • During the process of revising the Guideline document, the Commission looked at what exists
2 presently at the Airport and what would benefit the Airport by way of expansion.
3
4 Lori Brodosky:
5 • Owns a hangar at the Airport and has problems renting it.
6 • The City has a beautiful Airport and would like to see new businesses come to the Airport.
7
8 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:28 p.m.
9
10 PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED: 6:29 p.m.
11
12 Commission:
13
14 ATTACHMENT 1
15 Paqe1, Sections 1,2,3
16
17 Asked about the blank spaces that reference ordinance and exhibit numbers.
18
19 Staff: The blank spaces are placeholders that will be filled in later.
20
21 No other questions/comments.
22
23 Page 2, Section 3 continued. Section 4, Section 5, Section 6, Section 7
24 No questions/comments.
25 Page 3, Section 7 continued
26 No questions/comments.
27 Paqe 4, Section 7 continued
28 No questions/comments.
29 Paqe 5, Section 7 continued
30 No questions/comments.
31 Paqe 6, Section 7 continued
32 No questions/comments.
33 Paqe 7, Section 7 continued
34 No questions/comments.
35 Paae 8, Section 8
36 No questions/comments.
37 Paqe 9, Table 1: Eastside Uses and Permit Requirements
38 No questions/comments.
39 Paqe 10, Table 1 continued
40
41 Acting Chair poble:
42 • Related to Professional Offices, aviation related and non-aviation related, appears to have a
43 different standard for both.
44 • Related to professional office, aviation related use is allowed by right while a non-aviation related
45 use requires a use permit.
46 • Would like to know how the Commissioners view possibly making these uses equal.
47
48 Commissioner Sanders:
49 • The intent of the Airport Commission was to preserve/protect as much space as possible at the
50 Airport for aviation-related uses.
51 • Is of the opinion if the use is broadened this could negatively compromise aviation related
52 business opportunities because of competition for space. Competition for space does not appear
53 to be a problem currently at the Airport, but it could be in the future. The intent is to protect the
54 space for aviation related uses.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 6
1 • Related to professional office, understands the rationale for separating aviation related from non-
2 aviation related uses so as to preserve as much space as possible for future aviation related
3 purposes.
4 • Would like to hear more comments about the importance of making the uses equal.
5
6 Acting Chair poble:
7 • Business opportunities can happen around the Airport.
8 • There are many airports that have professional offices of all types and sorts which are leased and
9 generate revenue for the airports.
10 • To make a discretionary process more restrictive for one type of professional office versus
11 another seems to deter the potential for business development opportunities.
12 • Business development opportunities are highly important and a good thing for the City whether
13 located at the Airport or somewhere else.
14 • Is of the opinion it is restrictive to separate aviation related from non-aviation related use for
15 professional offices and to require different types of permitting.
16 • Asked if the Airport Commission has a comment about professional office and the difference in
17 how aviation and non-aviation are treated.
18
19 Don Albright:
20 • Worked for the Saving Bank of Mendocino County for 20 years and noticed as a matter of
21 banking policy that if someone wanted to construct professional offices it is highly beneficial if the
22 building/land is privately owned in terms of getting financing, down payments, etc. because the
23 bank then has some collateral in the event of a default on a loan and/or for other reason.
24 • Cited examples of privately owned buildings on the Airport that are typically aviation related as
25 opposed to non-aviation related uses because the owners understand such buildings/hangars
26 will eventually revert back to City ownership such that the cost of the investment to construct a
27 building must be financially worthwhile as opposed to, for instance, leasing a building for a non-
28 aviation related use. It is likely more cost effective to own the building and operate as an
29 aviation-related use than to risk of the same as a non-aviation related use because the function
30 of an airport is for aviation purposes.
31
32 Acting Chair poble:
33 • So the incentive for someone from a financing perspective for an aviation business at the Airport
34 is going to be greater if the particular business owns the building and land as opposed to a non-
35 aviation related use that likely rents space.
36
37 Don Albright:
38 • Most of buildings are not really customized or designed to accommodate professional office
39 uses.
40
41 Acting Chair poble:
42 • Questioned what type of aviation related professional office uses are we specifically talking
43 about?
44
45 Don Albright:
46 • Examples of professional office aviation related uses include: flight schools, car rentals and the
47 like such that these uses have a reason to purchase fuel at the Airport.
48 • Fuel sales represent the highest source of revenue generation for the Airport so it is important to
49 have uses that have a need to purchase fuel and these are mostly aviation related uses.
50
51 Acting Chair poble:
52 • Flight school and restaurants are already listed uses in the Use Tables in the regulations.
53 • Is looking for examples of aviation-related uses for professional office.
54
55 Eric Crane:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 7
1 • Related to professional offices, aviation related versus non-aviation related uses, the problem
2 when the Airport Commission looked at this use is not knowing what someone might propose so
3 rather than allow whatever use someone might propose, the Commission wanted to have the
4 ability to look more closely at a particular proposed use on a case by case basis if the use is not
5 directly related to the Airport.
6 • If someone comes in with a use that actually works with the Airport, this would be great. But, if a
7 dentist were to express an interest in renting a space in the main terminal area for a dental office,
8 for instance, and then a car rental agency also expressed an interest, would rather see that space
9 leased to the car rental agency because that is an aviation related use and supports the function
10 of the Airport. Does not want to see space locked in by a non-aviation use when that space could
11 be used for an aviation related use.
12 • Cited as an example the small saw/engine shop that operates on Airport property (Westside
13 North) that this non-aviation use is appropriate because the business is located in an area with
14 access from State Street and no direct access to the Airport, making aviation-related uses at this
15 site unlikely. Therefore, the use can be whatever it needs to be, non-aviation or otherwise. It is a
16 space that brings in revenue for the Airport.
17 • The closer one gets to the flight line and the closer one gets to the center of the Airport, the more
18 important it is to have checks and balances in place in terms of the allowed uses in order to
19 protect from potential displacement of a use that is aviation related and valuable to the Airport.
20
21 Acting Chair poble
22 • Would like an example(s)of aviation-related professional office uses.
23
24 Staff:
25 • The uses named in the use table are those that have been specifically identified and
26 acknowledged there are those uses that remain unnamed because they are unknown.
27 • Related to professional offices, aviation related and non-aviation related, the Commission
28 essentially wanted a placeholder. An aviation-related professional office would be determined
29 when someone requested to use space at the Airport.
30 • To speak why the two uses are treated differently, i.e., allowed by right versus a use permit, the
31 Airport Commission spent considerable time looking at the amount of space that is available at
32 the Airport versus what is available Citywide for businesses. The Commission really wanted to
33 preserve space at the Airport for aviation related uses. Someone could build or find tenant space
34 in the City and/or County rather than utilize space at the Airport that would take away from an
35 aviation related use and use limited Airport resources.
36 • Separating the two uses into allowed by right or use permit required encourages the aviation-
37 related use at the Airport and provides an incentive for non-aviation related uses to consider
38 locations other the Airport.
39
40 Acting Chair poble:
41 • Again, the separation of uses for professional offices provides for a prescriptive allowed use by
42 right for aviation related professional office use, but there is no description about what this may
43 be and this aspect is of concern.
44
45 Eric Crane:
46 • Other examples of an aviation related professional office uses are: aviation photography
47 business, repossession of airplanes, a doctor's office that does flight physicals, a consulting firm
48 that is aviation related that does the same work that the City hires out for to name a few uses.
49
50 Airport Manager Owen:
51 • Some aviation related professional offices businesses that operate on the Airport include: 1) an
52 FAA office; 2) a courier service office; 3) an aviation consultant who did aircraft appraisals that
53 operated in an office at the Airport for approximately a year; 4) Smith Air formerly operated a
54 charter air service at the Airport. The point is there are aviation related office functions at the
55 Airport.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 8
1 Acting Chair poble:
2 • It appears the two different professional uses can be defined and/or clearly broken out as to what
3 uses are aviation related.
4 • If both aviation-related and non-aviation related uses require a use permit, questions what
5 parameters would be used to identify their functions in terms of how the use benefits the Airport.
6 • The fact that an aviation-related professional office use does not require a use permit and can
7 essentially get started by right, there needs to be some sort of clear definition how such a use can
8 be helpful to the Airport if this is the reason for having two different use categories for
9 professional office. For instance, an engineering firm could have one aeronautical engineer on
10 staff at the Airport and questioned if this would qualify as an aviation-related professional office
11 use?
12
13 Airport Manager Owen:
14 • An aviation-related use would apply if the business is doing aeronautical activities.
15
16 Acting Chair poble:
17 • Is of the opinion some `gray area' exists when it comes to clearing defining/distinguishing aviation
18 related from non-aviation related uses for professional office. In this regard, the process is
19 considered discretionary. In which case, there are procedures/rules in place concerning the
20 process.
21 • It is important any time a particular use is allowed outright, the parameters related to the use
22 need to be clearly defined for the purpose of good decision making.
23 • Is of the opinion a distinction needs to be made about the two use types for professional office.
24
25 Commissioner Sanders:
26 • Asked Acting Chair poble if he is requesting non-aviation and aviation uses be allowed by right or
27 for both uses to be better defined.
28
29 Acting Chair poble:
30 • Is not advocating non-aviation uses be allowed by right, but rather the use types for professional
31 office be defined because the process is basically ministerial. It is for this reason, the category of
32 businesses for professional offices needs to be defined that fit under this ministerial process and
33 for a person to understand how to proceed.
34 • The process could involve: 1)defining the use; or 2) make all professional offices an allowed use.
35
36 Staff:
37 • Is not sure whether it is necessarily possible to come up with a definition for the uses.
38 • Is concerned with the process of just listing examples because this may not be
39 practical/productive or a process that can be done properly/accurately.
40 • What typically occurs for planning projects/business licenses is staff asks the applicant for a
41 written description of the project that explains the business operations and functions. Staff will
42 then review the project description to see if the use is allowed or not or allowed with approval of a
43 use permit for a particular zoning district.
44 • In the case of the Airport, what would occur for a proposed professional office use is it would be
45 reviewed by the Airport Manager to see if the use is aviation related and if it is and does not meet
46 the definition of a professional office non-aviation related use, the use would be allowed as an
47 aviation-related professional office.
48 • During the Guideline revision process, the Commission was not able to define the use types for
49 professional office.
50 • After working closely with the Airport Commission on the Guidelines document, making all
51 professional offices an allowed use was not the intent of the Commission.
52 • The Planning Commission is a different body so the Planning Commission can recommend
53 defining and/or making all professional offices an allowed use if this is its preference. However, it
54 was made very clear by the Airport Commission the approach of making all professional office an
55 allowed use was never the intent.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 9
1 Commissioner Christensen:
2 • Questioned how cumbersome it would be to just require a use permit for all professional office
3 use types because with this process, you would not be differentiating between the two uses.
4
5 Staff:
6 • The way in which the Airport Commission dealt with the use tables was to first look at what the
7 Airport currently has operationally, ask the question where the Airport wants be in the future and
8 if the use being evaluated will effectively get the Airport to the place it wants/needs to be in the
9 future and is this use aviation related and will it further the needs of the Airport.
10 • The aviation-related professional office use was one of those uses that could clearly enhance
11 the needs of the Airport and the Airport Commission's preference was to make those
12 professional office uses that are aviation related allowed by right if the use was found
13 compatible with Airport functions and require a use permit for those professional office uses that
14 were not aviation related.
15 • The Planning Commission could require a use permit for all professional office uses, but this is
16 contrary to what the Airport Commission wants to see. Again, the Planning Commission is a
17 different body and if it is the Commission's preference to make all professional offices require a
18 use permit the Commission has the authority to do this.
19
20 Commissioner Sanders:
21 • The use tables contain some examples of services/businesses such as Calstar, Reach, and
22 under rotocraft maintenance there is repair, service, painting etc., and inquired if is it possible to
23 add examples of aviation related uses for professional offices with a few potential uses?
24
25 Acting Chair poble:
26 • Is there an Airport Commissioner that can clarify what an aviation-related professional office use
27 might be?
28
29 Carl Steinmann, Airport Commissioner:
30 • Related to an example of a professional office use, are you looking at an office for a person to
31 set up in or a complex?
32
33 Acting Chair poble:
34 • The professional office use could be just a small office or a complex.
35
36 Carl Steinmann:
37 • The Airport and FAA have regulations related to height, width, trees, parking, and type of activity
38 that occurs near the runway.
39 • There is room in the entrance to the Airport for professional buildings, but the footprint of the
40 Airport is `pretty compact.'
41 • The east side of the Airport is not really a possibility at this time for professional buildings other
42 than Eastside North where the former lumber company operated.
43
44 Eric Crane:
45 • Referred to Attachment 2 (Airport PD Planning Area Map) to demonstrate the location of flight
46 lines and building restriction lines for the east side of Airport where construction is restricted or
47 prohibited. Concurred that the Eastside South is not conducive for professional office uses at this
48 time.
49 • Talked about the Westside North/Central where FBOs such as FED EX, Featherlite, T & M
50 Aviation operate and where the large hangars are located, including where the building
51 restriction lines for this side of the Airport are located. The Airport does not really have a lot of
52 space for office buildings/complexes because much of the space is built out and/or used for
53 aviation related activities, such as Calstar, Cal Fire and/or aviation related businesses that
54 operate from hangar buildings that also house aircraft and/or helicopters. Demonstrated space
55 on the west side that could be used for office space provided consideration is given to the flight
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 10
1 line and/or other building restriction areas. Talked about Westside Mixed South/Central and
2 Westside South having the potential for non-aviation related uses and noted where the flight
3 school and City-owned hangars are located.
4
5 Carl Steinmann:
6 • Again, there is office space available in the front entrance of the Airport where the Calstar
7 administrative buildings were formerly located. There are other office buildings in this location.
8 The Old Flight Service Station where Airport staff operates from has office space available for
9 small professional office uses.
10 • The Airport does not have the footprint for someone to build a two-story building with 25 offices,
11 for instance.
12 • FED EX is a nice professional office building that can be used as a hangar building in the future.
13
14 Eric Crane:
15 • The Airport has privately owned hangars, City-owned hangars that are leased and FBO hangars
16 that businesses operate from and demonstrated the location. Hangars are not really built to
17 accommodate professional office uses.
18 • Acknowledged that professional offices that are aviation related are allowed by right in Eastside
19 North, Subareas 1, 2 & 3 and Eastside South, Subarea 2 and Westside North, Central, South and
20 Westside Mixed South/Central with a use permit. As such, the Airport Commission is okay with
21 someone constructing a building that has offices that are in support of aviation related uses.
22
23 Acting Chair poble:
24 • It appears the Airport Commission does not support the need to clarify and/distinguish between
25 aviation related and non-aviation related uses for professional office in the proposed PD
26 Regulation document.
27 • Related to the warehouse and distribution use, is not clear why this use was addressed in the
28 original Guideline document but not in the revised Guideline/PD Regulations document. From a
29 business development standpoint, the opportunity to have some kind of warehouse or distribution
30 by aircraft should be available as a use.
31 • Related to the proposed new code document a warehouse/distribution use can only be
32 considered if there is a request for a Determination of Appropriate Use because it is not listed in
33 the use table as an allowed or permitted use, which is of concern from a business development
34 standpoint.
35 • Is of the opinion there should be at least a warehouse and distribution use category requiring a
36 use permit like other use categories so this use type can be fairly/reasonably evaluated.
37
38 Eric Crane:
39 • Warehouse and distribution should be a minimum consideration because one way airports die
40 and go away is non-aviation related uses move into `cheap' buildings on airports and displace
41 airplanes that drive fuel sales and support the infrastructure of airports. What happens is that
42 airports end up being `strangled to death.'
43
44 Acting Chair poble:
45 • Understands the Airport Commission's job is to advocate for the good of the Airport. The Planning
46 Commission's job is to advocate for business development throughout the City.
47 • Is of the opinion there should at least be a category in the use table for warehouse and
48 distribution. These uses would then have to go through a process just like all the other uses. Is of
49 the opinion, this could be a win-win situation. Warehousing/distribution was a use in the original
50 Guideline document and it is not in the proposed code document.
51
52 Eric Crane:
53 • The Airport Commission discussed and considered the Guideline document very
54 comprehensively and the product that came about is the document the Airport Commission
55 supports.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 11
1 • Accordingly, if someone wants to do something that is not in the use category, it needs to be
2 evaluated.
3
4 Commissioner Sanders:
5 • The Airport Commission is skilled and knowledgeable about matters that concern the Airport and
6 its operation.
7 • Does not want to require the Airport Commission to further review the Guideline document that is
8 now the proposed code document after spending 18 months looking at how the Airport operates
9 now, future development and compatibility of uses that would best benefit the Airport.
10 • Additionally, during the process of revision of the Guideline document there was considerable
11 Airport Commission discussion about compatibility of aircraft in terms of safety related to fixed
12 wing aircraft and rotocraft operating in close proximity to one another and looking at the eastside
13 as a potential area where rotocraft can be relocated to when the necessary infrastructure is in
14 place. Is of the opinion, the Airport Commission has worked diligently to bridge that gap between
15 rotocraft and fixed wing aircraft operations by recommending areas where the uses are most
16 compatible now and in the future.
17 • Is of the opinion the Planning Commission support the work done by the Airport Commission on
18 the code document because the Airport Commission is the expert on Airport matters and
19 functions.
20
21 Commissioner Christensen:
22 • Acknowledged the Airport Commission put in a lot of work on the PD Regulation document and
23 supports a recommendation to Council for adoption as written.
24 • Understands the Airport does not have the space to build large buildings that are not necessarily
25 to be used for aviation related purposes.
26
27 Eric Crane:
28 • Supports that development has an aviation-related component so that in the future when the
29 building reverts back to City ownership, it can be used for aviation related purposes, such as a
30 hangar.
31 • Has no problem with a non-aviation related use operating on the Airport for the short term as a
32 source of revenue if there is no demand for an aviation-related use.
33 • The work done on the Guideline document was formulated in the best interest of the Airport as it
34 presently exists/operates with consideration given to uses and potential improvements related to
35 future operation and development so the Airport can continue to be a growing, economically
36 viable and thriving municipal airport. During the process consideration was given to building
37 restrictions for compliance with Airport and FAA regulations and to explore ways to effectively
38 maximize and utilize the space that is available to its highest and best use for each of the zoning
39 districts.
40
41 Don Albright:
42 • Emphasized the importance of allowing for Aviation related uses as much as possible because
43 such uses support the economic viability of the Airport in that they typically purchase fuel and fuel
44 sales represent the largest source of revenue for the Airport that operates as an Enterprise Fund.
45 • There is a need to protect space for aviation related uses where feasible.
46
47 Acting Chair poble:
48 • The matter of professional office uses — aviation related versus non-aviation related and
49 warehouse and distribution uses were two items of interest to him requiring clarification.
50
51 Staff:
52 • Related to Commissioner Sanders' suggestion of adding some examples for professional office—
53 aviation related uses, supports including examples in the use table such as appraisal of aircraft,
54 insurance for aircraft, FAA offices, consultant, and courier businesses.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 12
1 Planning Commission Consensus:
2 • Supports the aforementioned change to professional office —aviation related uses by adding the
3 examples listed above.
4
5 Airport Manager Owen:
6 • The Airport receives grant funding from the FAA. As part of the grant assurances the Airport has
7 to use the money it receives from the FAA for the Airport and the Airport has to have airport
8 related uses.
9 • There are things we cannot do at the Airport because they are not aviation related.
10 • Uses that are not aviation related could jeopardize grant funding from the FAA. This was some of
11 the thinking that went behind the making of the use tables. If the Airport does allow a non-
12 aviation related use, a process is in place to make an informed evaluation/decision for the good of
13 the Airport that says this is why the use is allowed and what the terms are. As such, if a non-
14 aviation related use has a short term lease this would allow for an aviation related use to come
15 forward should there be a demand.
16 • Much of the thinking concerning the use table has to do with FAA grant assurances because the
17 FAA is very specific about having an airport and maintaining it as such.
18 • When there is non-aviation related activity at the Airport, every effort has to be made to
19 demonstrate to the FAA why this particular activity is occurring at the Airport. Related to the small
20 saw/engine shop that operates as a non-aviation related use in Westside North and is an
21 acceptable non-aviation related use at this location is because there is no access to the Airport.
22 • Where the City Corporation Yard is located there is no access for airplanes. The City Corporation
23 Yards pays the Airport to be at that location. The FAA does check to make sure airports are
24 receiving compensation for use of their facilities.
25 • When the Airport Commission reviewed the Guideline document, it was important the Airport not
26 violate the grant assurances.
27 • While the Airport can make policies/rules about rotocraft operations, the Airport is required to
28 make sure space is available for helicopters to operate because rotocraft are required by the FAA
29 to be allowed at the Airport.
30
31 There was discussion regarding rotocraft and uses and the locations where such aircraft uses are allowed
32 by right and where a use permit is required as shown on the use tables.
33
34 Paqe 11. Table 1 continued
35 No further questions/comments.
36 Paqe 12, Table 2: Westside Uses and Permit Requirements
37 No questions/comments.
38 Paqe 13, Table 2 continued
39 No questions/comments.
40 Paqe 14, Table 2 &Section 9
41 No questions/comments
42 Paae 15. Section 9 continued
43 No questions/comments
44 Paae 16. Section 9 continued
45 No questions/comments
46 Paqe 17. Section 9 continued
47 No questions/comments
48 Paqe 18, Table 3: Number of Parkinq Spaces Required, Parkinq requirements
49 No questions/comments
50 Paqe 19, Parkinq reauirements continued &Table 4: Parkinq Desiqn Standards
51 No questions/comments
52 Paqe 20, Table 4 continued, Landscapinq requirements and Table 5: Landscapinq Requirements
53 No questions/comments
54 Paqe 21. Table 5 continued, Liqhtinq Standards and Table 6: Liqhtinq Requirements
55 No questions/comments
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 13
1 Paqe 22. Table 6 continued, Section 10, Table 7: Site Development Permits
2 No questions/comments.
3 Paqe 23, Table 7 continued
4 No questions/comments
5 Page 24, Section 11 and Section 12
6 No questions/comments
7 Page 25, Section 12 continued and Section 13
8 No questions/comments
9 Page 26, Section 13 continued
10 No questions/comments
11 Paqe 27, Section 13 continued
12 No questions/comments
13
14 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:38 p.m.
15
16 M/S Sanders/Christensen to recommend City Council adopt the Ukiah Municipal Airport Zoning Map
17 Amendment and Establishment of Planned Development (PD) Regulations and Planning Areas Map, as
18 presented with revision to the professional office by adding examples of aviation related uses as
19 discussed above. Motion carried (3-0)with Commissioner Whetzel and Chair Pruden absent.
20
21 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
22 Senior Planner Jordan talked about the agenda for upcoming Planning Commission meetings.
23
24 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
25
26 12. ADJOURNMENT
27 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:51 p.m.
28
29
30 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION April 10, 2013
Page 14
1 ITEM NO. 9A
Community Development and Planning Department
G'ity of Zl�ah 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
planninq c(�.cityofukiah.com
(707)463-6203
2
3 DATE: May 22, 2013
4
5 TO: Planning Commission
6
7 FROM: Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
8
9 SUBJECT: Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
10 116 South State Street, APN 002-226-08
11 File No: 13-11-MP-PC
12
13
14 RECOMMENDATION
15
16 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed Mural Permit based on
17 the draft findings included in attachment 1 and subject to the conditions of approval included in
18 attachment 2.
19
20 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
21
22 A Mural Permit application has been received from Zane Molgaard to install three mosaic
23 murals at 116 South State Street, APN 002-226-08. The project is an effort by a group of Ukiah
24 High School Seniors who are in the process of completing their required senior project. Their
25 assignment is to find a problem in the community and address it using some sort of art (see
26 attachment 3, project description). This group has chosen to create and install three mosaic
27 murals on the basis that residents of communities with publicly displayed art are on average
28 happier and more productive then communities without publicity displayed art. Each mural
29 would be 4' 3" wide X 3' 3" tall and would be installed within the existing frame inserts along the
30 West Church Street wall of the project site (see attachment 4, site photo). Attachment 4 shows
31 the portion of the West Church Street elevation where the murals would be installed. The
32 existing commercial structure on the project site contains four storefronts. Two storefronts are
33 located on West Church Street side of the building just west of the area where the murals would
34 be installed and the other two storefronts are located on South State Street. The murals would
35 focus on the importance of one's community and would depict ideals that are important to the
36 citizens of Ukiah and the Ukiah Valley. Specifically the murals would include depictions of
37 music, nature and environmentalism, and intercultural understanding and cooperation.
38
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
1
1 As noted above the mosaic murals would be created by the students with the assistance of
2 Elizabeth Raybee, a local mural artist. The mural would be created off-site and then installed at
3 the project location.
4
5 SETTING
6
7 The project site is located at 116 South State Street, APN 002-226-08 which is the corner of
8 South State Street and West Church Street. The site contains a commercial structure that
9 houses four storefronts, two which face West Church Street and two which face South State
10 Street. The proposed murals would be installed on the south facing wall which runs parallel to
11 West Church Street. One mural would be installed within each of the three existing frame inserts
12 (see attachment 4, photo). The property is zoned Downtown Core and is surrounded by the
13 following uses.
14
15 • North: Commercial/Retail zoned Downtown Core
16 • South: Restaurant zoned Urban Center
17 • West: Retail zoned Urban Center
18 • East: Commercial /Retail zoned Downtown Core
19
20 STAFF ANALYSIS
21
22 General Plan. The project site has a Commercial (C) General Plan land use designation. The
23 existing commercial use is consistent with the purpose of this general plan designation and the
24 addition of the murals will not change the use. Furthermore the General Plan does not address
25 murals specifically; however the Community Design Element does stress the importance of
26 developing and maintaining a "Sense of Place". This has been interpreted to mean a positive
27 feeling or reaction to a particular place or community.
28
29 Zoning. The project site is zoned Downtown Core (DC) and surrounded by commercial uses.
3o The proposed murals would not change the existing land uses on the site.
31
32 Sign Ordinance. Murals are addressed as part of the City's Sign Ordinance. The Sign
33 Ordinance includes the following definitions that apply to this application.
34
35 Sign. A visual communications device used to convey a message to its viewers. A sign
36 shall mean and include every advertising message, announcement, declaration,
37 demonstration, display, illustration, insignia, surface or space erected or maintained in
38 view of the observer thereof for identification, advertisement or promotion of the interests
39 of any person, entity, product or service.
40
41 Mural. A painting on a wall or ceiling.
42
43 Advertising Message. Any written, graphic or pictorial form on a sign describing
44 products or services being offered.
45
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
2
1 Mural Permit. Murals are subject to the General Sign Provisions of the City Code, Section 3225
2 (G) and require review and approval by the Planning Commission. As part of the mural permit
3 process the Planning Commission must determine as to whether or not the murals are signs.
4 The criteria for review and evaluation of murals as both art and advertising are as follows:
5
6 A. compatibility with surrounding environment and community in general;
7 8. appropriateness of site;
8 C. relationship to use of building upon which it is placed;
9 D. impact on motorist and traffics hazards; and
10 E. advertising potential.
11
12 Written messages are discouraged. Any area determined to be advertising and allowed
13 to remain in the mural shall be counted as part of the allowed parcel signage.
14
15 Staff's analysis of criteria A-E is provided below:
16
Section 3225(G) Criteria Staff Analysis
Compatibility with surrounding environment The site contains a commercial structure and is located within the
and community in general. downtown commercial district. As noted in the project description
submitted by the applicant,the murals would depict ideals important
to Ukiah and the surrounding community. Specifically the murals
would represent 1)nature and environmentalism; 2)intercultural
understanding and cooperation and 3)music(see attachment 3,
project description).
The proposed murals would be compatible with other murals in the
downtown area in that they would all have a similar focus(community
interests)and would be similar in style(mosaic murals).
The mosaic style of the murals would complement the brick fa�ade of
the existing commercial structure on the site.
Appropriateness of the proposed mural. The site contains four different store fronts which include a wine
tasting room, retail store, law office and a jewelry shop. The themes
of the murals represent the community of Ukiah while not specifically
advertising the existing uses present of the site.
The site is located in an area that would be highly visible to the
general public and therefore would create a positive community
feeling and"Sense of Place",as noted in the General Plan
Community Design Element.
The proposed murals would include a rendering of an ocean wave, a
tree and a person playing a violin.The pictures in the murals do not
represent any of the uses of the building but are appropriate in that
they represent things that are important to the community.
Based on the above the murals would be appropriate for this location.
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
3
Section 3225(G) Criteria Staff Analysis
Relationship to use of building upon which The site contains a commercial building that houses four store fronts.
the mural will be placed. The uses include professional office, retail and wine tasting.These
uses are available to the general public and the proposed murals
represent the Community of Ukiah therefore based on this
relationship the murals would be appropriate to this site while not
representing anything specific to the uses on the site.
The proposed murals would include a rendering of a wave, a tree and
a person playing a violin.The murals do not represent any of the
uses of the building but represent things that are important to the
community.
The proposed murals would not include a written message.
Impact on motorist and traffic hazards. The mural would be visible to motorists traveling on West Church
Street. However,the graphics do not flash, rotate, blink or move. The
graphics also do not imitate or resemble official traffic or road signs
(e.g. "stop", "go slow°, "caution", "danger", "warning"or similar).
The mural permit application has been reviewed by the Public Works
Department and they did not have any comments.
The proposed mural would be out of the direct line of sight of
motorists traveling on West Church Street because the murals would
be located along the upper top portion of the West Church Street
elevation (see attachment 4, photo of mural location )
Based on the above the mural would not have an impact on motorists
and would not create a traffic hazard.
Advertising potential The murals would not represent an advertising message but would
convey a sense of community involvement and well being.
The proposed murals would include a rendering of ocean wave, a
tree and a person playing a violin.The murals do not represent any of
the uses of the building and would not contain a written message.
1
2 PUBLIC NOTICE
3
4 A notice of public hearing was provided in the following manner:
5
6 • posted in three places on the project site on May 10, 2013;
7 • mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on May 10, 2013; and
8 • published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on May 12, 2013.
9
10 As of the writing of this staff report, no correspondence has been received in response to the
11 notice.
12
13
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
4
1 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
2
3 The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
4 (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class 1(a) alterations to exterior of an
5 existing building, with no expansion to the existing use. The proposed project is consistent with
6 the provisions of Section 15301, Class1 (a) based on the following:
7
8 • The proposed project only involves minor alterations to the exterior of the building.
9 • The proposed project does not involve an expansion of the existing use or building.
10
11 DECISION TIMELINE
12
13 The proposed project is subject to the requirements of the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA). The
14 PSA requires that a decision be made on the project within 60 days of the application being
15 deemed complete. This application was submitted to the Planning Department on April 22, 2013
16 and was deemed complete on May 3, 2013. As such, a decision must be made on the project
17 no later than July 2, 2013. The applicant may request a onetime extension of the decision
18 timeline. The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting is June 12, 2013.
19
20
21 Attachments
22
23 1. Draft Mural Permit Findings
24 2. Draft Mural Permit Conditions of Approval
25 3. Project Description as submitted by application date stamped April 22, 2013
26 4. Photo of the portion of West Church Street elevation that would contain the murals
27 5. Conceptual Mural Sketches
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
5
1 ATTACHEMNT 1
2
3
4 DRAFT MURAL PERMIT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
5 THREE MURALS TO BE INSTALLED
6 AT 116 SOUTH STATE STREET, APN 002-226-08
7
8
9 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report,
10 the application materials and documentation, and the public record.
11
12 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the
13 General Plan as described in the staff report.
14
15 2. The proposed murals are consistent with criteria contained in Section 3225 (G) of the
16 Ukiah City Code, supported by the following.
17
18 A. Compatibility with surrounding environment and community in general.
19
20 • The site contains a commercial structure and is located within the downtown
21 commercial district. As noted in the project description submitted by the
22 applicant, the murals would depict ideals important to Ukiah and the
23 surrounding community. Specifically the murals would represent 1) nature
24 and environmentalism; 2) intercultural understanding and cooperation and 3)
25 music (see attachment 3, project description).
26 • The proposed murals would be compatible with other murals in the downtown
27 area in that they would all have a similar focus (community interests) and
28 would be mosaic murals.
29 • The mosaic style of the murals would complement the brick fa�ade of the
3o existing commercial structure on the site.
31
32 B. Appropriateness of the proposed mural to the site.
33
34 • The site contains four different store fronts which include a wine tasting room,
35 retail store, law office and a jewelry shop. The themes of the murals
36 represent the community of Ukiah.
37 • The site is located in an area that will be highly visible to the General Public
38 and therefore will create a positive community feeling and " Sense of Place ",
39 as noted in the General Plan Community Design Element.
40 • The proposed murals would include a rendering of a wave, a tree and a
41 person playing a violin. The murals do not represent any of the uses of the
42 building but represent things that are important to the community.
43 • The proposed murals would not include a written message.
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
6
1 • Based on the above the murals would be appropriate for this location.
2
3 C. Relationship to use of building upon which the mural will be place.
4
5 • The site contains a commercial building that houses four store fronts. The
6 uses include professional office, retail and wine tasting. These uses are
7 available to the general public and the proposed murals represent the
8 Community of Ukiah therefore based on this relationship the murals would be
9 appropriate to this site while not representing anything specific to the site.
10
11 D. Impact on motorist and traffic hazards.
12
13 • The mural would be visible to motorists traveling on West Church Street.
14 However, the graphics do not flash, rotate, blink or move. The graphics also
15 do not imitate or resemble official traffic or road signs (e.g. "stop", "go slow",
16 "caution", "danger", "warning" or similar).
17 • The mural permit application has been reviewed by the Public Works
18 Department and they did not have any comments.
19 • The proposed mural would be out of the direct line of sign of motorists
20 traveling on West Church Street because the murals would be located along
21 upper top portion of the West Church Street elevation ( see attachment 4,
22 photo of mural location)
23 • Based on the above the mural would not have an impact on motorists and
24 would not create a traffic hazard.
25
26 E. Advertising potential.
27
28 • The murals would not represent an advertising message but would convey a
29 sense of community involvement and wellbeing.
30 • The proposed murals would include a rendering of ocean wave, a tree and a
31 person playing a violin. The murals do not represent any of the uses of the
32 building and would not include a written message.
33
34 3. The proposed mural is compatible with surrounding land uses and will not cause impacts
35 to traffic, pedestrians or bicyclists since the murals will be attached to the building wall
36 and will not extend into the public right-of-way, pedestrian path, or parking area(s).
37
38 4. The proposed project, as conditioned, is exempt from the provisions of the California
39 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class
40 1(a), which allows alterations to the exterior of an existing building when there is with no
41 expansion of the existing use based on the following:
42
43 A. The proposed project only involves minor alterations to the exterior of the
44 building.
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
7
1 B. The proposed project does not involve an expansion of the existing use or
2 building.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
8
1 ATTACHMENT 2
2
3 DRAFT MURAL PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
4 THREE MURALS TO BE INSTALLED
5 AT 116 SOUTH STATE STREET, APN 002-226-08
6
7
8 1. This Mural Permit is granted only for the proposed murals addressed in the staff report
9 and shall not be construed as an approval for any additional murals or as eliminating or
10 modifying any building, use requirement.
11
12 2. This approval is not effective until the 10 day appeal period applicable to this Permit has
13 been exceeded, and any timely filed appeal has been reviewed.
14
15 3. All murals will be maintained in good condition. At any point as their condition becomes
16 deteriorated by graffiti, weathering or other means, as determined by the Planning
17 Director, they will be removed or obscured by the applicant or property owner.
18
19 4. This approval shall be null and void unless the California Environmental Quality Act/Fish
20 and Game filing fee of $50 payable to Mendocino County is filed with the City of Ukiah
21 Planning and Community Development Department within five (5) days of this approval.
22
23 5. All murals shall conform to the application approved by the Planning Commission and to
24 any supporting documents submitted therewith or made part of the administrative record,
25 including staff reports, maps and renderings submittals or documents any change to this
26 approval shall require an amendment to this approval.
27
28 6. This approved Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the
29 approved project related to the Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the
3o stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two
31 years of the effective date of approval; or if the established and use for which the permit
32 was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty-four (24) consecutive
33 months.
34
35 7. This approval is not effective unless and until all other required discretionary
36 entitlements have been granted, issued or approved as applicable.
37
38 From the Buildinq Official (David Willouqhbv)
39
40 8. A building permit is required before attachment of the murals to the building.
41
Ukiah High School Community Mural Senior Project
116 South State Street,APN 002-226-08
File No.:
9
� Aftachment # �
Re : Project Description
We are a group of high school seniors at Ukiah High School in the process of �
completing our Senior Project. The Senior Project is a comprehensive assignment '
required of all seniors in order to graduate . As members of the AP English Literature
Class , our task has been to find a problem in our community and address it using some
sort of art. The goal of the assignment is for students to learn the joy of making a lasting
positive impact, to change the community for the better, and for students to learn to work
together to accomplish large scale projects and learn the skills they may need to complete
it.
Our group has chosen to address the e�osure of art to the community and the
positive impacts it has on residents. It has been seen manytimes overthattowns and
cities with more publicly displayed art have on average happier and more productive
citizenries. Mendocino County and Ukiah specifically is well known for its art, claiming one
of the highest rates of professional artists per capita in the state' . We wish to continue and
advance this #radition by making our own contribution to our cit� s collection of public art.
We have decided that constructing a mosaic mural, to be displayed at 116 S . State
St. pending the approval of the Planning Commision, would be perFect for the assignment.
It involves us working not just with each other but also with community members and city
officials to learn the logistics and processes not just of making a mosaic piece , but also of
obtaining the proper approval and permits to display it in a public area . We have been
working with Elizabeth Raybee , an accomplished local artist with a string of murals under
her belt, who has been of quintessential importance in the process.
What follows are a series of sketches which are the basis for the three mosaics we
will construct. We aimed to capture themes and ideals important to Ukiah and the
surrounding community, including : nature and environmentalism; intercultural understanding
and cooperation; music; and the importance of one's community. These themes will blend
well with other murals and pieces of art on display in the downtown area , many of which
have a similar focus . Due to time constraints defined by the boundaries of the project we
' htt� ://www. northcoastca . com /showrecord . asp?id= 97
, • .v
will begin with the construction of one mural modeled on the first sketch (number one), with
the other two to be constructed at a later date . We are applying for all three mosaics as
part of the same project as theywill be completed bythe same artists and displayed in the
same locations .
The location we selected , the south facing outer wall of 116 S . State St. , contains
three e�asting inset bricked up windows (please see the attached pictures) which will act as
frames for our murals. We also selected this site and medium because cracked tile murals
are appropriate to the site' s brick facade as they blend modern art with 20th century
architecture . We hope that our Senior Project will inspire generations of students , artists ,
and community member to come to be happier, better people .
� � ���
�
r
Y
k
�
{
t
t
� i
�
�
Y
4
�
�
§
�
€
;
ti � �
� �3
j
� E
a`
`
��
i.. �
��
��., ���
� '. '
s�
.k�
sfiy �' � �':, x�� 3
`;�";
Y i��1`��t�<<. .
a �'�
�i'�r
��
s ,
?
�
,�o
��
�
�y +� �
i
g,
��y
���i
F,
,y=�.; �
f
�t=..'
a' �
�;::
a
�}
��.:;
�,
�i,,:3 4Y.; .
�
�i:
��C�C°�t!"�t��1� ��`
� �N� �� � � 3. ��.... ��� ��
� �
�� � ��,�.� � ��
��� ��' �� � �"k
��,, �� �. � ti
��
d} �3:n .;� . . . ����,.4;�
� ?�.s ���1 :�Y � � � .
��''' �a' • ;? ;*e . . '..t �3, .
��x� �� w 1` �4�, �.
';. ir � � �.
M � � � ����
�.�. �`y • . . . `�t
;;� .�, ;� . . � .
F ' j
>
� gi+:. ;� � ,;
�`
?r�"`�` . . . . �.
.�p�,> r� . . . . .. � � . . �.
� > : �
. �a, , � �
: � �,� �- � . . , .
�
. � � � � �� , . .
..x
� 3
� ��� �� � . . . . ..
�,� .. . ' >��- � �� .
,
� „ . �
� �p' �. ;
, .�� . � .l r 4 . , .
. .� .: . . . �� .
„ . , : .��.. . .
.h , �' .�; ,r ' . �.
" ��.� ; 'r�- .
e�
�
r �
�; �'� � � �
. ��. e,
� �� �� � � �
�i � �t� � � �i
�, �
r��. � � i
'��
��. f
�
. �h#w"�4, �A�: � .. . � .
��' , �� ... . . ,°
�! �„ � >
t r yt
�«�n,.�r . y
, ��" i � 1� . . � . � � . .
t ; � 7*
��� ' ?s � . ,. �
� � .,
s� .
<
,��a , r ,
ti ��. � �
a a��, ' � _ �
a,� , ,��w:
�d; � . . . . . �»b: .
a . . �� . k���
�
� ` .
� �'�,. , t' . . . ��'°, ..,'�,
3d'
„
e t.�
'�.s`ti ' �,�: . . � . ... . .. �uv w� . . � :.e�' .
, f • ,e � ' R7''� ,'.�<� � ..:.
n �.
t �t •
� .
.�;, k�. . . . ,\y°" .
t
e�,` � � ��� � , �4�����
p 1
F
R i� Y S �..,
���� d � � `�
�� ,t <.
^�;� � �
� � �� i � � ��
,�
, � ��
�6,� :t �° �
� x
_
„
; ' � ;-
�%
�� � �>
a
. ..�.� ' F � ; F#� ' � �� �
r�
�
k.
.� . . � ... . . .. . �; .
��
�`� s S. ', . . . ... . , � . _ ,=. ,,�„. .�.
r'°.<
� �
� r� � � � . ,g ; f 3 .
„
6 ��u�Ja� ' ' � ' .
?
�w.>`.,So-.., ..��.-H,.,. ...�.,.,�.::a.. . . � � �
.. � ",.,�. .
�
�„ �� fi�
��,� g � ����� � � �
9 � � ��
� � s�.� � ` �;a : �r� �,�ty,�P �a .� �dw '�W�� �1
, '} �.�`� � 't #: �,„ "�3, � .E 'u*t'$ +�� &. �' �*�i�� �
k �
£
n� �r � �t� � � � . � '�� � �i,
i �,,. £ i }$ * � �g � 4'i a'�, i .:fl' ,� � �+� ��
� y$ � r�$4 �'' ..}w§`� �u £- j� ��iY '��
�t4 �.� �, t-. 3`�i a � �1� y ... ,���n��€�3'� � zyg .7S '�
� 3� � t s �'S,�j� �. d„, .a� � ��3r �.s��� � `�"�
� � �
� � °� e ' k� � �"� ��.����. �'�� �F-
'� �$ � yi�� i'' ���'�1 `�'�S'���g } e E� ��`E� � :
S� �� � � ��, � : � Y`$w� �� �'�;� e s'� �'� 'v" "���`b � s�` �
w� � � � � ��
�+��{ �b Aro; � k .&V,��k� �"y*4`x`�s^T� � , ��3 .� N �,% �� �?W� � 5
` cA �`�` : : �Y,�L �``�' ?«� � � 4 �} ��C'� ��\
�� � i , . ; e�. .. �,�'�� t� }��` �''��. �`,x� „'« � ' xP�i���. ,� .
��� � � �. � �� � � �.. ��� � � � �f�
��f L�.�� .a�t,��"��`�'��„� � �v� -� �;,: p.,� ''��yr, '�,� � w ,���`� � ; .
£�' ��� � „ � �a � ,����a � ��� �� ,���}a �� � , �',Y �t �����
�-�q�"( ���4 g � § � ,R�'� � �t�'� �,� `� "tk'� ��.� �� s 'i v .
� t � $ ,� � y r � s . � 'L w� r � ? a 3 � �a�� �t ?.�,,� :� �� e� �. aw., �,`t'�^' � t
x� � a # x �'` � ? � � ��� "m
�� ti������ . ��}��� la z�' .g��; a t� �€ ,�}$�"�t" ���� � ���;t"� b aa ,,� ..� � � a
� �� � � �
� � ���� �` q ��t n� ��� � � � � � �. x
� � �,y x , x �4 �� � ��` � �`� � � � t� °
���" 'c �,z�� �� � � �" z �„ V�s��k ��` 3� �� ��� �`�? � �'�'����:���;*���.���,��yx� �� � � ' :'' }.. ..
����� �� � � ��� � �`�t,� �� ��3��y � �s����?� �k.. ��"� � n � �
�'��'�` �� �' � °�a' ,��' c� ��,awS. ��'4 "�t2, � ; >� �'� �� ..
� " �a ` s � �� � � �� �" � � - � '�a� s�� ;���� � �' „L p� q � � � g�,:�
�$�� `� � S 4 } 3 ,` �+ "ixL�. ,,,° � }� 8 �C �h �'z& !`��t� .,4 -� g� ��.
>,4'a 3� �� f a � °�� � .s � � � ��..¢ �'�� � a %�s�� �'^ �� ��
r att "� a . � .x� �' , �� �� � d� x Q�'�^��§
P[ �*�y �, y V �� �.{Y 4�"��`' 4 SY't:' � k.
�.k 0 � J �i ^.„ �y� .
(',"�. �r yy t f' §"'�� i � p" f . ¢ev W...
'i �
� � � 4s�t {, #� : � .w� c* 4 P�
��,�*�.�� �' F�`` � ,�- '� � ��c�e,� ��� �' `� � a� � : `��� ��"'� � � :c�'. :.
�.���C�, '� '�y ; �5 °� ,. ;f��C �;.�g�' � ,, '�A' � �t�.�� �m"�,`��"" �� a �,
� � x�,,� k, #d�' ' �" f` �1 z ro t�� .; �� ' t
a"�.�����:.���<`��, �� �'� �r��'� N � :+s . ,��` .' � ��.�'4��� �,� ; ..
,
� �� �� �s=,. . � " ` �.. n ` ,
�'r ��- ` . '�,. �i�ZU+ ,x
�i"b,:' "x ¢ - , .� � �. . �xi}+� r.y�� § ,
"� .$.,.�y� �1 .="'4a ' �3 � a '4 ,! F �#. �,. � �y.,�
d .
. '� ..�k���'4 � e �,y a� '4;� `�. '� � � "�'
4 ..tY � � , . 'x�`��� w,t� �` Sd �'
��d��ykt�� "�'; c a'�'` ` 'n'F& y "�^ ��V� �
B�; �
.�'.�`z�n,�s a*� , v��^ ����� '����mS3 '' ��l�;p�. � ��u ; � • � ' � � ��7,b� ^�. �' 7� �
w��� "+:. : '� � ��" .. �., �� �. . � 1 � �`�`�+� �
� ;at ri �y� � � x� �m t� �� ae � t � �' � ¢ �3 ,�� , °� �
� .. . '�'�.'�` `,��,��, � a��?..��.`� ��``¢k i�1ry���h:,a^�'�� ��� � �s. 3. �� `� '�,«�k �,�
,'x.�,e R i L' �i �4 �, d �" .t t ��'St-0��� ��?�` .� � �...k� �F � .
� � " � § t � �'�° ���i,� ��;� ;�� a�� �� ���,„ ' ` � w� d��a�h�
;�,�� �`� ��t t�� ��5� � ��'�� ��r " §S�3„��t�� �'���, r � � ��� ���� `�, .�.�
t '� . , � �vat a �u; s�a t� � e � �t � � �r�
� e.. 3?� �v � ��e �- a "��„ `"3� �4.'� `r ��'^w � � r � "� i
�� . '� '� � +��� +��. a�� tg ��. � �..
' ��,�`�3 �v�� � ` �'�� ��� ' �°.. � ` � � �� '� ���w'k�s 4'+a�a � �,'� .
�.�h � '` �� ,�� �' �' � `� - `�Y3; Y e�. 3°m�5 x>,� ` ` �
�{, a � �7 a4 �� 7 � �?�i �4�, ix� x : e ,�`�a�k r
f � �. � $ 3 x � a*�'�t �. ����;y �2"s�,..�,«e�:�
�� � �� . `- �, �4 �§ s,�� t�'t�S S b 2 �r�`�i', h`,�� wP"y���"��'�; x� k .
.s 'e � � t a � � � �, *t ; ��a � � . � ���. S
.�`�" "�� �Y:�", d� �a � �� t � `t� La ��ae '"�+ 'u ��r �a. '� � ��c� ��.
t. �`'s�x- .�" r,. oa� �'� a�' �� � : `�+e ,� t ;� �. .. � 2 � .
t l���x d.,� � a ��.. ��r �g� � � h� � � �� '��. .
4�� � a � �' ° �
� � . , e. � ' 'y t �s ' `� r . � t�;i
� :�r .. .. F , t
� ��� ����, � � � a��� ; �s� ��; � �,� � �`� �t z "� � `��, �,�..� �� ��
��� ��,��'� � ; � � � �� � c ���� �� `y��� �;' ��`P���� ��� . � �&�� �� �,
�,
�
� ����� �� iM � +� �' '� "��. � 4�`�, � �a"� �."t��' � � t '' '.
� � � ;4 �� � ? � � �s;�"�„ a s :����G � e � � � ����°��
� ' � w ��� ��� �a ^����">���� � <_�< � � � �x� �
'�,�. �� S ���� �� '�"' � �t '
� �� t� � i � �?�, � � � �� 't � ��� ��� �
� � �i° � �� ' � �� � �, � p; t t� �v � �, .
s � ��� � � '% �" � 5 �� � ��
� � < .�� � ,t� �.��� 3 � y�,� �� � a. �""�,� ��,. :
w .��.� �'` '� �� ��" . �,,�. � 5 : e`�e �`z�ek t �w a a�� �.
� �s ,� U �y ` Y '.' � �:� k „ �a. ' � ., d� .
� t 1� � . , �.� �Z ''`i; �. " , Y '�, s �� � �;, b y.. � .�'� .
�' ; x �� '�� �� � � � �i � ���� a ��
� 'y.� � �
1, *4�4• � . 9��:'�u�Y t � y.y a�a�.. �
. 4�i� � # �:` � � F� �J � � �°��� .
�'3 t `�n b� ;� � �,� 1
. �: � � �� .. ti � � s �� f ;
� ., � ,r 3�x ��' � ar� ��'C�J,� ���'� +' �` �' � � � .
�.. s,;.. � .., �� ' � � � � y' :
z�''� �� � "''a
� ���� ��`� � � �.
�,�
�
a ....... ...... .. .... ........ ....... .. .. .... . ..... . . ..... . ...... .. .. ....... . ...... . .. ..... . .......
�
4�
�:
�
. . . � . a&*-,�,a e.�,.w.:.n "�..,;�„ . . .
�"��� . � � � .
�� �
, 5, n <�
r
u, ; x
r �
��. � W
F � �
i `y
�
�' � �E:��
:
�, � ��� �r..� :
a � � �,e� �
�� � � � e
�� � �, � � �
� �� � �� z
��. �
w ����° � • t �
�a4�,
$,
�
��
��.,� � �
�
�� ``�`� � ��� ��_.� �� � �
��
��� � �
��.� �� �
` �` � � "°r.,.
.�
��'� ���°� "��'��`n,
a� ti� '�� � �� ��,:„
�,' ��
' ;. ,
��'�� �J�",`
°�ua��
���
. . . ���� ��� ....
� �� t
� � �t> � � �
� �
,��
r
p
�;
� ,.P� �
s
z � �
��� �
1 ITEM NO. 9B
Community Development and Planning Department
G'ity of Zl�ah 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
planninq c(�.cityofukiah.com
(707) 463-6203
2
3 DATE: May 22, 2013
4
5 TO: Planning Commission
6
7 FROM: Michelle Johnson, Planning Intern
8
9 SUBJECT: Request for approval of a Major Site Development Permit to allow a 5,600 square
10 foot addition to the existing B & B Warehouse.
11 923 Mazzoni Street, APN 002-040-37
12 File No: 13-10-SDP-PC
13
14
15 RECOMMENDATION
16
17 Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed project based on the
18 draft findings included in attachment 1 and subject to the draft conditions of approval included in
19 attachment 2.
20
21 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
22
23 An application has been received from William Daniel on behalf of Daniel Steel & Machine Inc.
24 requesting Planning Commission approval of a Site Development Permit to construct a 5,600
25 square foot addition to the existing B & B Warehouse located at 923 Mazzoni Street, APN 002-
26 040-37 (see attachments 3 and 7, project description and plans). The addition is proposed for
27 the north end of the existing warehouse and would be 80-feet by 70-feet and 31 feet in height.
28 The addition would be used to store steel, brass, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, and alloys
29 for the existing business.
30
31 The business currently has materials stored outside, as well as on the parcel located to the
32 north, 995 Mazzoni Street (APN 002-040-17). Both parcels are owned by William Daniel. The
33 purpose of the addition is to allow much of the materials currently stored outside to be brought
34 inside the new addition. Since the purpose of the addition is to provide indoor storage for
35 existing materials, no additional employees or customers are anticipated on the site as a result
36 of the addition. The applicant has indicated that the maximum number of employees on the site
37 at any time is 5, and the maximum number of customers at any time is 4.
38
39 The Project does not include any new parking spaces or landscaping.
40
41
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
1
1 SETTING
2
3 The project site is located at 923 Mazzoni Street (see attachment 4, location map and
4 assessor's parcel map).The parcel is a flag lot with a 30-foot wide frontage on Mazzoni Street
5 that provides access to the site. The site is developed with a 16,380 square foot building used
6 for office and warehouse, 4,800 hardware sales area, and parking lot. The site is relatively flat
7 and the surface is primarily gravel. The parking lot is striped for 11 parking spaces, and there is
8 room on the site to accommodate additional un-striped, informal parking as needed.
9
10 No landscaping or trees are located on the site. With the exception of the 30-foot wide access
11 from Mazzoni Street, the site does not have street frontage; therefore, there are no street trees
12 adjacent to the site. The parcels to the north, west and south are also owned by William Daniel
13 (see attachment 7, Project Site Plan).
14
15 The property is zoned Manufacturing (M) and is surrounded by the following uses.
16
17 ■ North: Eagle Distributing Zone (M)
18 ■ South: Light Industrial, Retail and Office Space Zone (C2)
19 ■ East: Railroad property & CM Storage (County)
20 ■ West: Industrial Uses Zone (C2)
21
22 BACKGROUND
23
24 The existing building on the site was approved through the following building permits prior to the
25 requirement for a Site Development Permit (see attachment 6, Building Permit Site Plan).
26
27 ■ 1983: New Metal Building (Permit#1541)
28 ■ 1985: 40-foot X 120-foot addition to the building permitted by Permit#1541
29 (Permit#2160)
30 ■ 1985: Addition to the building permitted by Permit#1541 to connect the building
31 located at 160 Brush Street, APN 002-040-38, (machine shop, fabrication
32 shop on attachment 6) to the building permitted by Permit#1541
33
34 As required by the Ukiah City Code, the Project was reviewed by the Design Review Board on
35 May 9, 2013. The Design Review Board provided the following comments on the Project:
36
37 ■ Prior to Planning Commission review of the Project, the applicant should provide
38 elevations of the building that include the proposed finished grade and height of the
39 building.
40 ■ Prior to Planning Commission review of the Project, the applicant should provide a site
41 plan drawn to scale for the Project to better understand the relationship of the addition to
42 the property lines.
43
44 No comments on whether or not the Project should provide landscaping were made by the
45 DRB.
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
2
1 STAFF ANALYSIS
2
3 General Plan. The land use designation of the subject property is Industrial (I). This land use
4 designation identifies areas where manufacturing and major employment may occur. The actual
5 use of the site is determined by the zoning of the site. The proposed warehouse addition is an
6 expansion of an established business and is therefore consistent with Economic Development
7 Goal ED-1 to support a strong local economy in that the project will allow a local business to
8 grow while continuing to provide employment to local residents.
9
10 Airport Compatibility Zone. The Project site is located to north of the Ukiah Municipal Airport
11 Compatibility Zone; therefore, the Project is not subject to these compatibility requirements.
12
13 Zoning and Site Analysis. The zoning of the site is Manufacturing (M). Storage, light and
14 heavy industrial/manufacturing uses which have no appreciable offensive or objectionable
15 noise, odor, dust or nuisance factor are allowed uses. The existing use and the proposed
16 addition is an allowed use. Table 1 below includes the applicable requirements of the zoning
17 ordinance with staff analysis.
18
Table 1: Zoning Ordinance Consistency
Zoning Ordinance Requirement Staff Analysis
Uses
Allowed:Warehouse and storage with no The existing and proposed warehouse use is an allowed use. The
appreciable or offensive odor, noise,dust existing hardware sales use is an accessory use and is often included
or similar nuisance factors. as part of a metal sales business and warehouse use. Therefore,
Uses accessory to any allowed or permitted the Project is consistent with the allowed uses in the Manufacturing
use zoning district.
Development Standards
Setbacks The addition would continue the front(facing Mazzoni Street)and
Front(east property line): 5 feet rear(railroad tracks)setbacks established by the existing building
Side(south/north property lines):0 feet The existing front and rear setback are consistent with the
Rear(west property line):0 feet requirements and this would not change as a result of the Project.
The existing building is located over the south side property line
(see attachment 4). Therefore,the project does not comply with
this requirement. This is an existing condition that was permitted
by the City in the 1980s, making the setback non-conforming.
Should the applicant propose changes to this part of the building in
the future,a lot line adjustment may be required in order to remedy
this non-conforming condition in order to issue a building permit.
The building is proposed over the north side property line (see
attachment 6 photo#3). This is not allowed by zoning, Building or
Fire Codes. In order to remedy this condition,staff has included
conditions of approval (which have been explained to and discussed
with the applicant) requiring application for and approval of a lot
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
3
Table 1: Zoning Ordinance Consistency
Zoning Ordinance Requirement Staff Analysis
line adjustment. The purpose of the lot line adjustment is to
relocate the property line in a manner that allows the Project to
comply with zoning requirements, Building and Fire codes.
Height The proposed building height will be consistent with the existing
Building height:50 feet building(see attachment 6 photo#4)31 feet to the eaves and 33
ZO Section 9178(AJ foot at the center/ridge of the roof.The DRB commented that
additional information on the height of the building should be
provided since there is no information on the plans related to the
grade or the pad for the building. Staff has included a condition of
approval that this information be included on the plans submitted
for building permit and that the height of the building addition
match the height of the existing building(see condition#4).
Parkin
Vehicle Parking(ZO section 9198) Based on 16,380 sf of warehouse,4,800 sf of hardware sales area,
Warehouse: 1 space for every 2,500 square and 5,600 square feet of new warehouse space, 28 parking spaces
feet up to 25,000 sf; 1 for each additional are required (9 spaces for warehouse space plus 19 spaces for sales
10,000 sf area). There are currently 11 striped parking spaces on the site and
room for additional onsite informal parking.
Sales Area: 1 parking space for each 250 sf Based on a maximum of 5 employees and 4 customers at a given
of sales area time,9 parking spaces would be required. No additional employees
or customers are anticipated as a result of the Project. Should there
be additional employees and/or customers there is adequate room
on the site to park.Therefore,the 11 parking spaces provided is
adequate to serve the use and staff is not recommending additional
parking be provided.
Bike Parking Based on 27 required vehicle parking spaces,3 bicycle parking
10%of the required vehicle parking spaces spaces would be required. Given the nature of the use, it is not
where it is determined that the use would anticipated that customers would visit the site by bicycle.
attract bicyclists. Employees may travel to the site by bicycle and it appears that
there would be plenty of locations on the site to park a bicycle.
Based on the above,staff has not included a condition of approval
to provide bicycle parking. Should the Planning Commission
determine that bicycle parking should be provided;a condition of
approval requiring bicycle parking should be applied to the Project
at the meeting.
Landsca in
There are no specific requirements for Due to the nature of the business and use of the site,staff is not
landscaping in the M zoning district. recommending any landscaping be provided. The site is located in
an area zoned Manufacturing and Heavy Commercial and is
surrounded by similar uses.
The single-family home located to the northwest of the site has
surrounded by landscaping that screens the surrounding
businesses/uses and would screen the proposed addition.
Should Planning Commission determine landscaping should be
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
4
Table 1: Zoning Ordinance Consistency
Zoning Ordinance Requirement Staff Analysis
provided,staff requests this be discussed with the applicant at the
hearing and a condition of approval be applied to the Project if
necessary.
1
2
3 Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines for Commercial Developments outside of the
4 Downtown Design District apply to commercial developments. The proposed project is a
5 warehouse use on property zoned Manufacturing. Based on the use of property, type of
6 development proposed and the zoning of the property, the Guidelines are not applicable to the
7 Project.
8
9 Site Development Permit: Per Zoning Ordinance Section 9261(e), Planning Commission
10 approval of a Site Development Permit is required for exterior modifications to commercial or
11 industrial structures that exceed 1,000 square feet. The proposed addition is 5,600 square feet;
12 therefore, a Major Site Development permit is required. Table 2 below includes the required Site
13 Development Permit findings along with staff's analysis.
14
15
Table 2: Site Develo ment Permit Anal sis
Site Develo ment Permit Findin s Staff Anal sis
The proposed project is consistent with the The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as
oals and policies of the Cit General Plan. described in the General Plan section above.
The location, size and intensity of the proposed The proposed project site is currently developed and has a
project will not create a hazardous or driveway.The project site does not have street frontage therefore
inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic does not have a sidewalk.The proposed addition would be
paftern. located at the rear of the existing site and will not change the
current pedestrian or vehicular traffic pattern.Therefore the
project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or
edestrian traffic attern
The accessibility of off-street parking areas and The accessibility of the existing off-street parking and driveways
the relation of parking areas with respect to would not change as a result of the proposed addition therefore
traffic on adjacent street will not create a no hazardous or inconvenient conditions will be created on
hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent adjacent streets.
or surrounding uses.
Sufficient landscaped areas have been The project site is located at the rear of the property and is
reserved for purposes of separating or currently separated from adjoining building sites by perimeter
screening the proposed structure(s) from the fencing.
street and adjoining building sites, and breaking There is a single-family residence located to the west of the
up and screening large expanses of paved proposed addition. There are trees and landscaping surrounding
areas. the residence that provides screening of the surrounding
manufacturing uses.
The site is zoned Manufacturing and located in an area developed
with other similar Manufacturing uses and development.
Based on the location and zoning of the Project, surrounding siliar
uses, and screening of the single-family residence to the north, no
screening is required. Also of note is that the Manufacturing
zoning district does not include landscaping requirements(see
below .
The proposed development will not restrict or The proposed addition will be located at the rear of the site and
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
5
cut out light and air on the property, or on the separated from buildings on the site and adjacent properties a
property in the neighborhood;nor will it hinder substantial distance.Therefore,there is adequate separation
the development or use of buildings in the between buildings and the Project will not restrict or cut out light
neighborhood, or impair the value thereof. and air on the property or on adjacent properties.
The proposed addition is a continuation of an existing allowed
use. The addition will allow materials currently located outside to
be stored indoors. This could improve the appearance of the site.
and as such will not hinder the development or future use of
industrial buildin s in the nei hborhood
The improvement of any commercial or N/A
industrial structure will not have a substantial The site is not located in or adjacent to a residential zoning
detrimental impact on the character or value of district.
an ad'acent residential zonin district.
The proposed development will not excessively The site is located in an industrial/manufacturing area developed
damage or destroy natural features, including with an existing office/warehouse building, parking area, and the
trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of ground is primarily covered in gravel. No water courses,wildlife,
the site. wildlife habitat,floodway or flood plain or other environmentally
sensitive areas are present.
There is sufficient variety, creativity, and The proposed addition is located at the rear of the site and will be
articulation to the architecture and design of the consistent in design and materials to the existing building.
structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony The use of the building is warehouse for steel and metal storage.
and/or a box-like uninteresting external This type of building usually has a simple rectangular form in
appearance. order to allow proper use and function. The design of the addition
will continue the form, materials, and colors of the existing building
which is appropriate for the use, setting, and design for an
addition.
The addition will not be visible from public locations.
1
2
3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
4
5 The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
6 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 Class 1 (e) (2), Existing Facilities which allows additions of
7 less than 10,000 square feet to an existing structure provided that the project is in an area
8 where all public services are available and the project site is not located within an
9 environmentally sensitive area based on the following.
10
11 ■ The total square footage of the addition is 5,600 square feet.
12 ■ The project site is located in an area where all public services and facilities area
13 available.
14 ■ The project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area in that the site is
15 located in an urban area that includes a variety of industrial uses.
16 ■ The site is developed with a building that is currently used and will continue to be used
17 for offices/warehouse and associated parking areas and landscaping. No water courses,
18 wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood plain or other environmentally sensitive areas
19 are present. No trees will be removed as a result of the addition furthermore the addition
20 will not encroach into the drip line of the existing trees.
21
22
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
6
1 PUBLIC NOTICE
2
3 A notice of public hearing was provided in the following manner:
4
5 ■ posted in three places on the project site on May 10, 2013;
6 ■ mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on May 9, 2013; and
7 ■ published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on May 12, 2013.
8
9 As of the writing of this staff report, there has been no correspondence received as a result of
10 the public notice.
11
12 DECISION TIMELINE
13
14 The project is subject to the requirements of the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA). The PSA
15 requires a decision to be made on projects that are exempt from the California Environmental
16 Quality Act (CEQA) within 60 days of the project being determined complete. The project was
17 submitted to the Planning Department on April 3, 2013 and was complete on May 2, 2013.
18 Therefore, a decision must be made on the project no later than June 30, 2013. The next
19 regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting is June 12, 2013. The PSA allows the
20 applicant to request a onetime extension of the decision timeline.
21
22
23
24 ATTACHMENTS
25
26 1. Draft Site Development Permit Findings
27 2. Draft Site Development Permit Conditions of Approval
28 3. Project Description from Applicant date stamped April 3, 2013 and Supplemental
29 Information from Applicant date stamped May 16, 2013
30 4. Location Map and Assessor's Parcel Map
31 5. Site Photos
32 6. Building Permit Site Plan
33 7. Project Plans date stamped April 3, 2013 and May 16, 2013
B&B Warehouse Expansion
923 Mazzoni Street,APN 002-040-37
File No:13-10-SDP-PC
7
1
z ATTACHMENT 1
3
4
5 DRAFT SITE DEVELOPMENT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
6 A 5,600 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING B & B WAREHOUSE
7 LOCATED AT 923 MAZZONI STREET, APN 002-040-37
8 FILE NO: 13-10-SDP-PC
9
10 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report,
11 the application materials and documentation, and the public record.
12
13 1. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan as described
14 in the staff report.
15
16 2. The proposed Project is not located north of the boundaries of the Ukiah Municipal
17 Airport compatibility zone, and, therefore, is not subject to the compatibility
18 requirements.
19
20 3. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as
21 described in Table 1 of the staff report.
22
23 4. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the following specific findings
24 required pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 9263(E) in order to approve a site
25 development permit.
26
27 A. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan as described in the
28 General Plan section above.
29
30 B. The proposed project site is currently developed and has a driveway. The project
31 site does not have street frontage therefore does not have a sidewalk. The
32 proposed addition would be located at the rear of the existing site and will not
33 change the current pedestrian or vehicular traffic pattern. Therefore the project
34 will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern.
35
36 C. The accessibility of the existing off-street parking and driveways would not
37 change as a result of the proposed addition therefore no hazardous or
38 inconvenient conditions will be created on adjacent streets.
39
40 D. The project site is located at the rear of the property and is currently separated
41 from adjoining building sites by perimeter fencing.
42
43 E. There is a single-family residence located to the west of the proposed addition.
44 There are trees and landscaping surrounding the residence that provides
45 screening of the surrounding manufacturing uses.
46
47 F. The site is zoned Manufacturing and located in an area developed with other
48 similar Manufacturing uses and development. Based on the location and zoning
1
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1 of the Project, surrounding similar uses, and screening of the single-family
2 residence to the north, no screening is required. Also of note is that the
3 Manufacturing zoning district does not include landscaping requirements (see
4 below).
5
6 G. The proposed addition will be located at the rear of the site and separated from
7 buildings on the site and adjacent properties a substantial distance. Therefore,
8 there is adequate separation between buildings and the Project will not restrict or
9 cut out light and air on the property or on adjacent properties.
10
11 H. The proposed addition is a continuation of an existing allowed use. The addition
12 will allow materials currently located outside to be stored indoors. This could
13 improve the appearance of the site and as such will not hinder the development
14 or future use of industrial buildings in the neighborhood.
15
16 I. N/A
17 The site is not located in or adjacent to a residential zoning district.
18
19 J. The site is located in an industrial/manufacturing area developed with an existing
20 office/warehouse building, parking area, and the ground is primarily covered in
21 gravel. No water courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood plain or other
22 environmentally sensitive areas are present.
23
24 K. The proposed addition is located at the rear of the site and will be consistent in
25 design and materials to the existing building. The use of the building is
26 warehouse for steel and metal storage. This type of building usually has a
27 simple rectangular form in order to allow proper use and function. The design of
28 the addition will continue the form, materials, and colors of the existing building
29 which is appropriate for the use, setting, and design for an addition. The addition
3o will not be visible from public locations.
31
32 5. The proposed project, as conditioned, is exempt from the provisions of the California
33 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class
34 1(e)(2) , that consists of projects that involve additions to existing structures provided
35 that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 square feet; the
36 project is located in an area where all public services and facilities are available and the
37 project site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area. The exemption is based
38 based on the following:
39
4o A. The total square footage of the addition is 5,600 square feet.
41
42 B. The project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area in that the site is
43 located in an urban area that includes a variety of industrial uses. The site is
44 developed with a building that is currently used and will continue to be used for
45 offices/warehouse and associated parking areas and landscaping. No water courses,
46 wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood plain or other environmentally sensitive
47 areas are present. No trees will be removed as a result of the addition.
48
2
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1 C. The project site is located in an area where all public services and facilities are
2 available.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
3
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1
2 Attachment 2
3
4
5 DRAFT SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
6 A 5,600 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING B & B WAREHOUSE
7 LOCATED AT 923 MAZZONI STREET, APN 002-040-37
8 FILE NO: 13-10-SDP-PC
9
10
11 1. Approval is granted for the 5,600 square foot addition to the existing warehouse located
12 at 923 Mazzoni Street as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department and
13 date stamped April 03, 2013 and May 15, 2013 except as modified by the following
14 conditions of approval.
15
16 2. On plans submitted for building permit these conditions of approval shall be included as
17 notes on the first sheet.
18
19 3. In order to comply with zoning ordinance, building, and fire code requirements related to
20 the location of the proposed addition and the north side property line, the Project is
21 subject to the following conditions:
22
23 A. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a site plan drawn to scale
24 that includes the location of the existing building, proposed addition, all of the
25 information required to be provided on building permit site plans, and the
26 proposed relocation of the parcel line shared with APN 002-040-17. The
27 relocated property line and location of the addition in relationship to the
28 property line shall demonstrate compliance with zoning ordinance, building
29 and fire code requirements.
3o B. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment (LLA) is required. The
31 plans submitted for the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in
32 condition # 3A above and consistent with zoning, building and fire code
33 requirements.
34 C. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the approved LLA shall be recorded
35 and documentation of the recorded LLA provided to the Planning
36 Department.
37
38 4. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff
39 review and approval:
40
41 A. Elevations of the building that include the proposed finished grade and height
42 of the building. The height of the addition shall match the height of the
43 existing warehouse building and shall comply with the height requirement of
44 the Manufacturing zoning district.
1
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1
2
3
4 From the Building Official (David Willoughby)
5
6 5. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment (LLA) is required. The plans
7 submitted for the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in condition # 3A
8 above and consistent with zoning, building and fire code requirements.
9
10 From the Fire Marshal (Chuck Yates�
11
12 6. Due to the type of building proposed (steel) and the contents to be stored in the building
13 (steel) the requirement for sprinklers shall be waived. If, in the future, the occupancy or
14 the contents located in the structure change, the current requirement for sprinklers,
15 alarms, exiting, exit lighting and all current requirements, will be immediately enforced
16 according to the code.
17
18 7. Portable fire extinguishers shall be required according to the code and the occupancy
19 ha1. Due to the type of building proposed (steel) and the contents to be stored in the
20 building (steel) the requirement for sprinklers shall be waived. If, in the future, the
21 occupancy or the contents located in the structure change, the current requirement for
22 sprinklers, alarms, exiting, exit lighting and all current requirements, will be immediately
23 enforced according to the code.
24
25 8. Portable fire extinguishers shall be required according to the code and the occupancy
26 hazards (Title 19).
27
28 9. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within
29 the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as
3o measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site
31 hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. (CBC
32 508.5.1)
33
34 10. In locations where flammable vapors could be present, precautions shall be taken to
35 prevent ignition by eliminating or controlling sources of ignition. Open flames and high-
36 temperature devices shall not be used in a manner which creates a hazardous condition.
37 Heating equipment shall be of a type approved for hazardous locations (CFC 3403.5)
38 (Title 19).
39
40 11. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within
41 the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as
42 measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site
43 hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. (CBC
44 508.5.1)
45
46 12. In locations where flammable vapors could be present, precautions shall be taken to
47 prevent ignition by eliminating or controlling sources of ignition. Open flames and high-
2
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1 temperature devices shall not be used in a manner which creates a hazardous condition.
2 Heating equipment shall be of a type approved for hazardous locations (CFC 3403.5)
3
4 From the Department of Public Works (Ben Kaqevama )
5
6 13. Application for and approval of a lot line adjustment (LLA) is required. The plans
7 submitted for the LLA shall be consistent with the site plan required in condition # 3A
8 above and consistent with zoning, building and fire code requirements.
9
10 14. All areas of circulation shall be paved with a minimum of 2" of AC on 6" of Base,
11 concrete, or other suitable all-weather surface approved by the City Engineer. This
12 includes the proposed driveways and parking areas. If heavy truck traffic is anticipated
13 from the solid waste company, delivery trucks, or other heavy vehicles, the pavement
14 section should be calculated appropriately to ensure that it can withstand the loading.
15
16 15. If the building permit value of work exceeds $101,180, or the proposed improvements
17 create the net addition of two or more plumbing fixtures units to the building, the existing
18 sanitary sewer lateral shall be tested in accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No.
19 1105, and repaired or replaced if required.
20
21 16. If the building permit value is equal to or greater than one-third of the value of the
22 existing structure, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees, along the subject property
23 street frontage, shall be installed or repaired if needed, pursuant to Section 9181 of the
24 Ukiah City Code. This may include upgrades of existing sidewalk to meet current ADA
25 standards.
26
27 17. Any work within the public right-of-way shall be performed by a licensed and properly
28 insured contractor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within
29 this area or otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3%
30 of estimated construction costs.
31
32 Standard City Requirement
33
34 18. Construction hours are limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through
35 Saturday.
36
37 19. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law,
38 regulation, specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or
39 Federal agencies as applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building,
40 electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect
41 at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued.
42
43 20. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be
44 completed prior to building permit final.
45
46 21. Building, Grading or other required Permits shall be issued within two years after the
47 effective date of the Site Development Permit, or the discretionary actions granted by the
48 permit shall expire. In the event the required Permits cannot be issued within the
3
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC
1 stipulated period from the project approval date, a one year extension may be granted
2 by the Director of Planning if no new circumstances affect the project which otherwise
3 would render the original approval inappropriate or illegal. It is the applicant's
4 responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to the Planning
5 Department prior to the two-year expiration date.
6
7 22. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Site Development Permit shall be granted
8 only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the Site Development
9 Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone
10 requirements except to such specific purposes.
11
12 23. The approved Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation
13 process if the approved project related to the Site Development Permit is not being
14 conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project
15 is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established
16 land use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty
17 four (24) consecutive months.
18
19 24. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
20 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
21
22 25. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and
23 their agents, successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the
24 City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim,
25 action or proceeding brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the
26 purpose of which is to attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application.
27 This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, costs, expenses,
28 attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted by any person or entity,
29 including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's action on this
3o application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the part
31 of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be
32 void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the
33 agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
34
35
36
37
38
39
4
B&B Warehouse Expansion
Planning Commission Staff Report
923 Mazzoni Street
File No:13-10,SDP-PC