HomeMy WebLinkAbout12112013 - packet CITY OF UKIAH
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
December 11, 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, PRUDEN, CHAIR WHETZEL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes from the following meeting are included for review and approval:
A. November 21, 2013
The minutes from the following meeting will be available for review and approval at the
January 8, 2014 meeting:
A. November 13, 2013
5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The Planning Commission welcomes input from the audience. In order for everyone to
be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more
than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be
taken on audience comments.
6. APPEAL PROCESS
All determinations of the Planning Commission regarding major discretionary planning
permits are final unless a written appeal, stating the reasons for the appeal, is filed with
the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision was made. An interested
parry may appeal only if he or she appeared and stated his or her position during the
hearing on the decision from which the appeal is taken. For items on this agenda, the
appeal must be received by December 23, 2013 by 5:00 p.m.
7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE
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.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Costco Warehouse and Fueling Station Site Development Permit (SDP),
Airport Park Boulevard (File No. 11-1-REZ-SDP-CC-PC and 11-16-EIR-CC).
Planning Commission consideration of the Costco Warehouse and Fueling Station site
development permit. The Project includes construction of a 148,000 square foot
Costco Warehouse store and 20-pump fueling station, 607 parking spaces,
landscaping, and associated site improvements on a 15.33 acre parcel on the east
side of Airport Park Boulevard, south of Ken Fowler Auto Center. The Project
includes: a Costco store with a bakery, pharmacy, optical center, hearing aid testing
center, food court, photo center, tire sales and installation; fueling station with 16
pumps with the ability to expand to 20 pumps; sales of approximately 4,000
products; and employment of 175 to 200 people. On December 4th, the City
Council considered the certification of the EIR and continued the consideration of
the certification of the EIR to its December 18, 2013 meeting. Since the
Planning Commission cannot consider the Site Development Permit until the EIR
has been certified by the City Council, staff is requesting that the Planning
Commission continue this public hearing to a date certain of]anuary 22, 2014.
10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
12. AD70URNMENT
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 November 21, 2013
3 M i n utes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair Judy Pruden
7 Kevin Doble
8 Linda Sanders
9 Laura Christensen
10
11 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
12 Charley Stump, Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
13 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15
16 1. CALL TO ORDER
17 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at
18 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
19
20 2. ROLL CALL
21
22 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
23
24 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —The minutes from the November 13, 2013 meeting will be available
25 for review and approval at the December 11, 2013 Meeting:
26
27 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
28
29 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Whetzel read the appeal process. For matters at this meeting, the
30 final date to appeal is December 2, 2013.
31
32 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
33
34 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Confirmed by staff.
35
36 9. PUBLIC HEARING
37 9A. Costco Wholesale Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Airport Park Boulevard (File
38 No. 11-1-REZ-SDP-CC-PC and 11-16-EIR-CC). Planning Commission consideration and
39 possible recommendation to the City Council to certify the Costco Wholesale Project
40 Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Project requires City Council approval of a Rezoning
41 and Planning Commission approval of a Site Development Permit to allow construction of a
42 148,000 square foot Costco Warehouse store and 20-ppump fueling station, 607 parking spaces,
43 landscaping, and associated site improvements on a 15.33 acre parcel on the east side of Airport
44 Park Boulevard, south of Ken Fowler Auto Center. The Project includes: a Costco store with a
45 bakery, pharmacy, optical center, hearing and testing center, food court, photo center, tire sales
46 and installation; fueling station with 16 pumps with the ability to expand to 20 pumps; sales of
47 3,800 to 4,000 products; and employment of 175 to 200 people. The Planning Commission
48 held a public hearing on the Costco Wholesale Project Draft EIR on February 27, 2013.
49
50 Planning Director Stump:
51 • Briefly explained the process for tonighYs Commission review/consideration of the Costco
52 Wholesale Project EIR, Statement of Overriding Conditions, Rezoning and corresponding public
53 hearings.
54 • Public comments will be limited to 5 minutes per person and explained the procedure.
55 • Introduced Brian Grattidge, EIR consultant with Dudek &Associates.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 1
1 • Costco consulting team is also present to answer Commission questions.
2
3 Brian Grattidge, EIR Consultant with Dudek & Associates, (Project Management/QAQC) gave a
4 PowerPoint presentation related to the FEIR. (Refer to attachment 1)
5
6 Michael Okuma, Costco introduced the Ukiah Costco project team.
7
8 Commission: The bulk of the Final EIR has to do with responses to public comments. As such,
9 preference is to first receive public comments.
10
11 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:28 p.m.
12
13 Mary Anne Miller: Expressed her project concerns and subsequent environmental impacts related to air
14 quality, transportation and traffic, wetlands, and aesthetics that are specifically addressed in her letter to
15 Planning staff dated November 21, 2013. (Refer to attachment 2)
16
17 Jim Watt:
18 • Is a retail consultant and was asked by Pear Tree Shopping Center associates to review the
19 Costco EIR.
20 • Is of the opinion two areas require further study: 1) Urban Decay-The analysis in this regard was
21 predicated on the assumption that the Ukiah Costco store would generate sales annually
22 between $85 and $120 million annually. The average sales figure per square foot for the Costco
23 store is $1,116.00 so for a 148,000 square foot store the annual sales figure calculates to $165
24 million. Average sales volume is typically evaluated on the square footage for that particular
25 company. Is of the opinion this matter was not properly evaluated and that the sales volume
26 figures in the FEIR are not accurate and suggests the study be re-analyzed in order to get a clear
27 picture of the economic impacts to the community. 2) Transportation and Traffic — Understands
28 the traffic consultant has to evaluate how traffic arrives at the destination of the Costco location
29 and identify what arterials serve that location. How this would occur for most people would be to
30 exit highway 101 at the Talmage off-ramp. In the traffic study for the FEIR, it was estimated 34°/o
31 that represents northbound traffic would use the Talmage off-ramp to get to the Costco store.
32 which is a grossly low figure and inadequate taking in consideration the Sphere of Influence for
33 Ukiah and those traveling to Costco that reside outside of the Sphere of Influence that would use
34 the freeway and exit the Talmage off-ramp not only from northbound traffic but southbound as
35 well. Is of the opinion the percentage should be increased to at least 50% or more as this is more
36 realistic. This increased figure would significantly alter the assumptions and conclusions for use
37 of that highway interchange.
38 • Is of the opinion the completion concerning the proposed interchange improvements at
39 Highway/101/Talmage and intersection of Airport Park Boulevard are still `somewhat
40 questionable' in that the funding has not been secured. Until funding is secured there is no
41 guarantee the interchange improvements can be made. If the improvements are not made and
42 the Costco store is opened, a serious and hazardous condition/problem would exist on Highway
43 101 at the Talmage off-ramp where people would be put at risk. Should this be the case, approval
44 of a Condition of Overriding Statement in this regard cannot be justified because the City would
45 be jeopardizing the safety of its citizens.
46
47 William Kopper:
48 • Is a practicing attorney in Davis, California and is representing Ukiah Citizens for Safety First, a
49 California Association, Rachel Land, Patty Hernandez, James Houle, Sandy McKee and Teri
50 Stout.
51 • Introduced into record for review Caltrans study information and City response to his request for
52 information regarding trip generation figures and mitigation measures for the Talmage/101
53 interchange project, and his comments to the DEIR/FEIR acting on behalf of other clients
54 concerning the Walmart Expansion Project.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 2
1 • Does not agree with the figures/numbers in the Trip Generation Study conducted for the
2 Talmage/101 interchange. Is of the opinion the numbers were manipulated to show a lower
3 impact concerning the interchange. From a safety perspective related to the
4 Highway101/Talmage interchange cited Dan Smith, a well-respected traffic engineer, had pointed
5 out in his comments on the Costco EIR that the queuing calculations were not done correctly
6 according to the acceptable standard in the traffic engineering industry related to queuing. As
7 such, is of the opinion, the Project without the mitigation of the improvements at the interchange
8 would violate the City's general plan.
9 • The City's general plan does not permit the City to approve a project where the safety of citizens
10 is placed at risk. Because the mitigation is necessary to mitigate impacts of the Project, the
11 mitigation has to be evaluated in this EIR and not a separate EIR or a Mitigated Negative
12 Declaration. Although the EIR/FEIR continually relies on the concept that Caltrans has approved
13 the proposed improvement configuration this is not what the letter from Caltrans says in that
14 Caltrans has significant concerns with the proposed geometrics of the interchange at US 101 and
15 Talmage Road. Caltrans says that after review of the traffic modeling it would appear the
16 interchange could handle those traffic volumes that are projected in the traffic model. The
17 modeling indicates 34% of the Project trips are coming from the north. What Caltrans does not
18 address is the configuration of the interchange which requires a number of design exceptions.
19 These design exceptions have not been approved and they create many safety issues. The City
20 needs to have at least the confidence that those designs exceptions are going to be granted
21 before the City can move forward.
22 • Has other comments, but deferred those project comments to the documents he submitted to City
23 staff this evening.
24 • The FEIR contains Mr. Kopper's comments concerning the DEIR, letter 133, pages 2-247-2-269.
25
26 Chair Whetzel: Mr. Kopper is an attorney who represents clients opposed to big box stores in
27 communities and this represents the bulk of his practice.
28
29 Senior Planner Jordan: Recommended the Commission take a break at some point so that staff can
30 review the documents/comments Attorney Kopper submitted this evening.
31
32 William Kopper: The work he does challenging big box stores represents only a small portion of his
33 practice.
34
35 Ernie Olson:
36 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
37 • Comparing big box store and/or other significant retail store ratings, Costco is ranked high.
38 • Likes to shop at Costco.
39 • Supports approval of the project.
40
41 Brian Kornegam:
42 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
43 • Also has project concerns related to transportation and traffic impacts. Trusts the Planning
44 Commission will consider all the facts/studies and make a sound decision.
45 • Supports the Costco project as proposed.
46 • Ukiah has a traffic problem all over the town not just at the Highway 101/Talmage Road
47 interchange.
48
49 Chuck Williams:
50 • Resides in the area on Betty Street in Ukiah.
51 • Expressed concerns related to traffic in and around the Talmage Road and Airport Park
52 Boulevard.
53 • Talked about the terrain in the area where Costco would be located and what has occurred to the
54 land as ownerships have changed over the years. Addressed some of the damage to the land
55 that has occurred and whether the applicant would be required to mitigate some of the damage.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 3
1 Cited damage in the area that has occurred was the result of manmade making of wetlands that
2 was not a natural condition.
3 • Noted the water table in that area is high particularly at the southern end of the proposed site for
4 Costco and cautioned there could be problems associated with having a gas station at that
5 southern end due to fuel spills and corresponding possible contamination in a designated wetland
6 area. Cited the fuel-associated contamination that occurred at the City Corporation where the
7 underground plume of contaminants that migrated had to be cleaned up. When reading the
8 remediation of this particular clean-up, the document stated the plume was located far enough
9 away from any significant creek/tributaries and the Russian River.
10
11 Pinky Kushner:
12 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
13 • Gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding the proposed gas station as part of the Costco project
14 and associated potential impacts. (Refer to attachment 3) Also, commented on the matter of the
15 Wetlands that exist in the area of the proposed Project.
16 A gas station presents certain hazards and explained how so. This project component would be
17 located right next to the first wetland area. Ukiah is known for having very wet winters and is
18 concerned about fuel contaminant runoff located near a wetland area.
19 • A gas station is also associated with GHG emissions in connection with climate change.
20 • Recommends no gas station for the Project.
21 • The EIR does not do a `robust' analysis of the land immediately adjacent and south of the Costco
22 site. The reason it should do a `robusY analysis of that land is because it is a `wetland.' There are
23 actually two designated wetlands in the southern location that are interconnected. Does not see
24 within the EIR and within all the comments and responses in the document there is valuable
25 description of that wetland. The only place where the wetlands are clearly documented is in the
26 aerial photographs.
27
28 Susan Knopf:
29 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
30 • Likes that the Costco Project will include lots of trees.
31 • Preference is native trees that would include Oak and Redwood trees, particularly along the
32 freeway that would effectively screen the retail building from the highway.
33 • Oak and Redwood trees are environmentally helpful because they are known to absorb large
34 amounts of carbon emissions.
35
36 Commissioner poble: Asked if Ms. Knopf would come back during the site development permit phase
37 of the Project to discuss landscaping and recommend the planting of native trees.
38
39 Marlene Shupe:
40 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
41 • Talked about good use of public funds. Ukiah is a small town. Does not like being solicited to help
42 pay for the community's ballpark at Anton Stadium.
43 • Does not like using public funds for putting red/green marker signs on sidewalks and is of the
44 opinion this is an unnecessary/wasted expense. Associated with the Costco Project is now the
45 concern the City is getting into the real estate speculation business followed by the use of public
46 funds to pay for interchange improvements that should not be the financial responsibility of the
47 City. Is of the opinion that Costco should be participating in some way for paying for the
48 necessary improvements.
49 • Public funds have already been put out money for real estate and now more tax payer money will
50 be utilized to pay for road interchange improvements for a business that is going to come in and
51 put other tire stores in town out of business. There are already seven existing tire stores in Ukiah.
52 There are also more than six gas stations in Ukiah. The amount of retail space Costco is
53 dedicating to tires and a gas station will almost wipe out every one of these same businesses in
54 town.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 4
1 • The intent then is essentially the trading of tax dollars from big corporations at the expense of
2 locally owned businesses. Is concerned about the fiscal impact Costco would have on the
3 community. Is of the opinion the matter of fiscal impact was not fully analyzed.
4 • Understands while Costco is a big box operation, and unlike Walmart it maintains a good
5 reputation in communities utilizing very fair operating practices with regard to its employees.
6 Costco would still displace people. Even though jobs would be created by Costco coming to town,
7 the management team will not be coming from Ukiah and most likely brought in from other areas.
8 • What is of concern to her the most is the use of taxpayers' money to fund for the improvements to
9 the Highway 101/Talmage Road interchange.
10 • Submitted comments concerning the Costco project and is included as Letter 156 on page 2-237
11 of the FEIR. (Refer to attachment 4)
12
13 Daphne Macneil:
14 • Is a resident of Ukiah.
15 • Expressed concern about the proposed gas station component of the Costco project particularly
16 with regard to the lack of access for responders in the event of an emergency situation.
17 • Does not support the gas station component of the proposed Project.
18 • Provided written comments (refer to attachment 5)
19
20 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:12 p.m.
21
22 Break: 7:12 p.m.
23
24 Reconvene: 7:40 p.m.
25
26 Planning Director Stump:
27 • Staff has reviewed the comments made and submitted tonight.
28 • Staff is confident the FEIR is adequate in light of the comments received tonight and can be
29 recommended for certification to City Council.
30 • Related to the improvements to the southbound off-ramp at the Highway 101 and Talmage Road
31 interchange advised this particular project is going to happen regardless of whether or not Costco
32 comes to town. The Project is intended to provide solution to traffic problems for buildout of the
33 Airport Industrial Park. Staff has been working diligently with Caltrans concerning the interchange
34 improvements. Caltrans supports the design aspects of the Project and City staff/Caltrans are
35 working through the `request for exceptions.' Is of the opinion the exceptions have been `whittled
36 down'to a very manageable level.
37 • Costco cannot be issued a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the retail store until the Highway
38 101/Talmage Road interchange improvements are made. Related to the Mitigation Monitoring
39 and Reporting Program, mitigation measure 3.10.1 in the FEIR indicates the City shall make
40 those interchange improvements and that no CO will be issued to Costco until the exchange
41 project is approved and completed.
42
43 Michael Okuma, Costco: Confirmed that Costco would not open until the Talmage intersection
44 improvements are completed.
45
46 Commissioner poble:
47 • Related to a project with significant and unavoidable (SU) impacts, which for the Costco Project
48 include environmental impacts to air quality, transportation and traffic and global climate change,
49 if the economic, legal, social technological or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the
50 significant and unavoidable environmental effects of the Project that these environmental effects
51 may be considered acceptable with approval of a Statement of Overriding Condition for the
52 significant and unavoidable environmental impacts identified. Requested clarification the
53 Statement of Overriding Considerations pertinent to transportation and traffic is a `technicality'
54 because it is not funded right now?
55 • Legally, it cannot be said the improvement project will occur?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 5
1 • Essentially then, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is a separate matter? Asked if
2 anything changes and/or if the City of Ukiah Interchange Project is affected if a Statement of
3 Overriding Considerations has to be made.
4
5 Planning Director Stump:
6 • Confirmed the funding for the interchange improvements is not 100% secured. Staff/Caltrans are
7 working toward making the improvement project happen and tremendous progress has been
8 made in this regard.
9 • While there may be some mention in the findings supporting a Statement of Overriding
10 Considerations related to the transportation and traffic, confirmed a Statement of Overriding
11 Considerations is essentially a separate matter.
12 • Confirmed the interchange project would not be affected if a Statement of Overriding
13 Considerations must be made for the significant and unavoidable impact to transportation and
14 traffic.
15
16 Brian Grattidge coordinated the general responses by the EIR consultants:
17 • Traffic Study Consultant Steve Weinberger will comment on trip distribution and traffic volume at
18 the Highway 101/Talmage Road Interchange.
19 • Consultant Amy Herman did the Urban Decay study and will provide a perspective on the sales
20 figure issue and the associated rationale thereof.
21 • Acknowledged that experts/specialists have noted that the future operability of the Talmage
22 interchange is a problem. Several EIRs have identified the need for improvements to the
23 US101/Talmage Road interchange, including the Wal-Mart EIR, Costco EIR, and EIR for the
24 quarry. The Ukiah Valley Area Plan also identifies the need for improvements to the US101/
25 Talmage interchange. The Talmage interchange is a future condition that has to be dealt with.
26 The EIR analyzed how Costco interacts with this reality as well as how mitigation would interplay.
27 • With regard to traffic and related air quality and GHG issues, pointed out that in the EIR the no
28 gas alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. This does not necessarily
29 mean that this is the alternative City Council should adopt because consideration has to be given
30 to feasibility, but nonetheless the `no gas station alternative' is identified as the environmentally
31 superior alternative superior alternative. However, this alternative does not avoid or substantially
32 reduce the three impacts (traffic and transportation, air quality/GHG emissions and global climate
33 change) being discussed as significant and unavoidable.
34 • Even with the reduced volume of traffic associated with eliminating the gas station, the Talmage
35 interchange would still operate unacceptably, so the same interchange improvement would be
36 required to mitigate the impact.
37
38 Commissioner poble:
39 • Asked related to air quality and the issue of GHG emissions in connection with the gas station not
40 being part of the Project would still not bring this environmental impact down to a level of less
41 than significant(LTS)?
42 • Technically, the gas station component would not have an effect on the decision that has to be
43 made concerning a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant and unavoidable
44 impacts to air quality/GHG emissions.
45
46 Brian Grattidge:
47 • The elimination of the gas station would not bring the impacts to air quality and associated GHG
48 emissions down to a less than significant level.
49 • The EIR does a good job of addressing the gas station component of the Project as being an
50 auto-centric/warehouse use and that while eliminating the gas station would reduce impacts to air
51 quality, it would not be anywhere near less than significant under the thresholds used.
52 • Acknowledged in association with the three significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the
53 EIR, whether or not a gas station is relevant to the discussion would not have an effect on the
54 decision that has to be made concerning a Statement of Overriding Considerations and is a
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 6
1 separate discussion. But environmentally speaking, the significant impacts that are identified do
2 not change with or without the gas station.
3
4 Commissioner poble: There is a distinction between the `ProjecY and project components such as the
5 gas station and project related changes that may have to be made versus whether or not the
6 environmental document adequately addresses the impacts.
7
8 Steve Weinberger,W-Trans, EIR Traffic consultant:
9 • Prepared the traffic study for the Costco EIR as well as for the Walmart Expansion project.
10 • Related to the trip distribution/directionality of the traffic that is also referred to as trip generation,
11 and the critiquing of the percentages that were assumed just to be clear the study assumed 49%
12 of the Project traffic would travel through the Talmage Road interchange coming from various
13 directions. About one-half of the traffic destined for Costco would utilize that interchange. The
14 associated numbers came from market analysis where population densities within the market
15 analysis were looked at very closely.
16 • Noted Attorney Kopper requested a copy of this analysis, which was provided to him.
17 • The interchange design is currently in progress. Has evaluated the improved interchange design
18 in the EIR and it meets Caltrans standards.
19 • It is his professional opinion that with the improvements and even with the assumption of higher
20 traffic volumes suggested at this interchange, the same mitigations would apply and the
21 interchange would operate at an acceptable level.
22 • Related to the comments relevant to the queuing calculations noted most of the comments are
23 focused on ramp queuing on the freeway that has already been identified as a significant impact
24 in the EIR and will be mitigated by the proposed interchange improvements. The methodology
25 used in the traffic study to calculate the queuing at the interchange is the one required by
26 Caltrans and the same one used for the Walmart Expansion project. Caltrans has reviewed the
27 information and has not provided any comments to the contrary that the results were
28 inappropriate.
29
30 Amy Herman, ALH Urban & Regional Economics, EIR fiscal (Urban Decay Analysis):
31 • Related to the public comment questioning the estimated annual sales volume for the store and
32 the belief the figures used in the analysis were not comparable is of the opinion those markets
33 used in the sales volume analysis for the Costco Project are comparable. As documented in the
34 urban decay analysis, the City of Ukiah census area has about 27,000 people with the City
35 having approximately 16,000 people and the entire population area consists of approximately
36 140,000 people, which is a relatively sparse area for having to determine the market area for a
37 large retail store. Some of the stores used as comparisons in the analysis were Eureka and
38 Madera since they have similar market conditions as Ukiah.
39 • As a point of reference, the City of Santa Rosa alone has approximately 170,000 people, which is
40 20% greater than the entire market area estimated for the Ukiah Costco. This information tells us
41 that the Ukiah Costco is not likely to achieve high sales volumes as high as the national average.
42
43 Planning Director Stump:
44 • Staff finds the FEIR adequate and strongly encourages the Commission to recommend City
45 Council certify the document.
46 • Responses will be made to the information received and comments made at tonighYs meeting.
47
48 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:52 p.m.
49
50 Commissioner Sanders: Read a letter entitled `Redwood Business Park formerly the Airport Industrial
51 Park Wetlands.' Obtained her research information from the original Walmart EIR document in 1992.
52 (Refer to attachment 6)
53
54 Commissioner poble:
55 • Acknowledged the historical context made about the area, but this is not how it exists today.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 7
1 • Would more information from experts about how the area was evaluated particularly with regard
2 to existing wetlands and the associated impacts. It appears as though the drainage from the area
3 that is proposed for the fueling station drains directly into the wetlands now when looking at the
4 topography. The proposed mitigation/condition seems to take the drainage around that area, not
5 allowing it to go downstream. Questions how much of this analysis was evaluated for impact to
6 this sensitive area.
7 • Is there clear mention of wetlands off-site?
8
9 Brian Grattidge:
10 • It is essentially correct to say the site drains into the southerly area identified as wetlands,
11 assuming this area is designated as wetlands.
12 • The proposed Project would modify that drainage somewhat. While the qualified
13 drainage/hydrology expert who performed the analysis is not present, can state the analysis did
14 examine how the drainage works now and how the drainage would be altered with the Project
15 and implications to water quality off-site where the determination was made there would be no
16 significant off-site effect. It would require some modification of how the existing culverts would
17 operate. However, in terms of potential impacts to water quality/drainage no substantial change
18 from what occurs presently was identified.
19 • The EIR provides a drainage study and plan for the site. Is of the opinion the drainage plan is
20 feasible for the site and project. A final drainage plan is required and this plan would be reviewed
21 by the City, Caltrans and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Is confident the mitigation
22 measures required are feasible and would avoid impact to this southerly area. Acknowledged
23 there is additional design level work that needs to be done for that area. In terms of the
24 corresponding engineering of this work would defer to the applicant for this information.
25 Again, drainage/water quality and potential impacts were closely examined. As for the site itself, it
26 is historically different than the sites for Walmart and/or other developments in the area because
27 they do not contain any wetlands so there was no nexus in terms of requiring restoration or
28 enhancement to such wetlands.
29 • Related to the mention of wetlands offsite, acknowledged the wetlands are identified as to
30 location in the bio-section of the EIR as to what exists south of the proposed Project.
31 • Noted a primary biological concern was in regard to special status birds residing in the wetlands
32 or in Highway 101 drainage area that might be disturbed/displaced by the Project activities.
33
34 Commissioner poble: Having knowledge about the wetlands and that they do not exist on the site,
35 should the Project move forward to development and the Commission's review thereof? Can the
36 Commission require additional conditions and look more closely at the area to the south at that time or
37 does this have to be done now?
38
39 Senior Planner Jordan: The aforementioned matter concerning the wetlands is not related to the Site
40 Development Permit. The wetlands are off-site whereas issues related to the Site Development Permit
41 concern matters on-site. If the Commission has concerns about the area to the south, it should be
42 addressed tonight.
43
44 City Attorney Rapport: Related to whether the EIR adequately addresses the wetlands and the
45 associated impact of the Costco project on the wetlands this aspect should be looked at.
46
47 Commissioner poble:
48 • What should occur if a determination is made that there is sufficient information to make an
49 informed decision to certify the EIR and the Project moves forward but the Commission may
50 want to reduce the size or relocate the gas station. Does the Commission have discretion at that
51 time? Does the Commission have control over how the gas station is oriented and where it is
52 located on the property?
53 • Is of the opinion the EIR does provide adequate information and the additional information
54 provided tonight does not change the Commission's decision as to whether or not we should not
55 proceed with recommending certification of the EIR. It may, however, change our approach as to
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 8
1 how the Commission reviews the Site Development Permit and no matter what happens there is
2 going to have to be some sort of mitigation on site to address the input to the drainage area
3 south of the Project. It is all about the amount of input and/or where things are located on the
4 property. `Source control measures' is what is of importance to this drainage area. It is then not
5 about treatment but rather where `things/structures/infrastructure' are located on the property
6 and is open to discussing this aspect. Is of the opinion it is not important to discuss this location
7 of things tonight in that level of detail. What we do know is wetlands exist and there is a sensitive
8 area that has to be dealt with. There is mention of this sensitive area in the EIR related to plants,
9 animals, and birds in that these species need to be recognized. Is not comfortable not
10 recommending certification of the FEIR based on the fact the document is not providing sufficient
11 information.
12 • Does have questions about the Project itself with regard to the layout of the site and is confident
13 these aspects can be adequately tackled.
14 • Knowing the interchange improvements and the statement of overriding considerations related to
15 the impacts that cannot be successfully mitigated right now are more of a technicality which
16 provides a greater level of comfort about the Project and with recommending certification of the
17 EIR.
18
19 Senior Planner Jordan: The gas station is associated with the Site Development Permit so the
20 Commission does have discretion.
21
22 Commissioner Sanders:
23 • Asked about the vacant parcels off-site and can a recommendation be made that Lot 2 and Lot 4
24 are established as open space. Currently in the development of the AIP there is no open space
25 areas designated and/or could this be a mitigation measure?
26 • Related to the aesthetics and/or other environmental concerns would be lighting for the canopy
27 of the gas station that will be open until 10:00 p.m. and with there not being a buffer between the
28 wetlands and the site the habitats living in the area would be affected/impacted by this very
29 urbanized kinetic environment.
30 • It appears to be poor planning to have a gas station in the location proposed and understands
31 this is a site development issue discussion. Is of the opinion the environmental document does
32 not adequately address the species that use and reside in the area and as such has concerns
33 about the siting of the gas station and the lack of interest in doing anything about the wetlands
34 when every other portion of the AIP has been filled in with developments when historically the
35 matter of wetlands and corresponding habitats residing in the area should have been addressed
36 in the environmental document.
37
38 Senior Planner Jordan:
39 • The matter of an open space designation may be a recommendation related to the rezoning
40 which is the next part of the process. I am unclear as to why such a designation would be
41 necessary as a mitigation measure for the Project.
42 • To clarify the impacts related to aesthetics were identified as less than significant (LTS) with the
43 exception of light and glare. Would like to hear from the other Commissioners how aesthetics
44 have not been adequately addressed in the EIR.
45 • There is a biological section in the EIR that discusses habitat with mitigation measures included
46 for the protection of nesting birds and/or habitat-related issues. Is of the opinion the biological
47 section of the EIR adequately addresses the matter of habitats.
48 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED: 8:26 p.m.
49
50 Pinky Kushner: Two wetlands exist that are connected by the Caltrans drainage pipe adjacent to
51 Highway 101. Assessment of the northern wetland area that borders the Costco property
52 describes/identifies how the terrain has changed with the modifications made to the land overtime as to
53 how drainage currently operates. This wetland area is supposed to drain via a pipe located to the east
54 underneath the freeway. However, during times of high water, has observed that the pipe does not work
55 adequately such that the water moves right along the highway down into the second wetland area located
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 9
1 more to the south. The second wetland area also has a drainage pipe that goes under the freeway. Is of
2 the opinion the description of those two wetlands that is essentially one wetland should be part of the EIR.
3
4 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:29 p.m.
5
6 Brian Grattidge:
7 • Related to the drainage analysis that was recently done for the FEIR acknowledged that the
8 water does back up from the culverts during high water events and that the site being talked
9 about is a backup area. One of the objectives of the drainage plan is to actually help improve that
10 situation of backup. Obviously the Project would not want to be in a condition where those rain
11 events would bring water up to the new development. Ms. Kushner is correct in saying that the
12 culverts do not always operate as intended.
13 • Related to the site layout and possible layout of the proposed gas station, the EIR for the most
14 part looked at lighting and aesthetics as well as certain corresponding design characteristics and
15 acknowledged there is some design discretion/consideration in terms of how the development will
16 operate that can be taken during Planning Commission review of the site development permit.
17
18 Chair Whetzel: Is of the opinion the FEIR is adequate for the Project and supports certification.
19
20 Commissioner Sanders:
21 • Related to air quality, one of the mitigation measures is to design a roof structure to
22 accommodate future solar power and questions why not require the installation of solar now as a
23 mitigation measure.
24 • Asked if the EIR consultant could respond to the criticism concerning the air emissions modeling
25 for the development
26
27 Brian Grattidge:
28 • The solar issue was looked at. There are solar Costco stores.
29 • Related to the air quality modeling and GHG emissions, parking must comply with City
30 standards. As for the modeling analysis a lot of criteria/variations were used such as maximum
31 building size, parking accommodations, where shoppers would be coming from etc., and in doing
32 so some of the mitigation measures that would be required were not discounted particularly with
33 the range of what percentage of reductions related to air quality might be anticipated/expected.
34 `The air quality district is often fairly silenY on some of those variations on ways to reduce GHG
35 emissions and improve air quality. The modeling was done as to what is expected for a
36 development of the size of Costco in terms of the locality and where shoppers will be coming
37 from so it was not necessary to look at a regional discount but rather assume that the trips would
38 be new trips where `long rural defaults rather than urban' were used. From this perspective the
39 air quality emissions data in the EIR is extremely conservative. It is unlikely the conclusions of
40 the analysis would change even if certain other criteria/variations to the model were
41 considered/used.
42
43 FEIR, Chapter 2
44
45 No further Commission questions/comments.
46 FEIR, Chapter 3
47
48 No further Commission questions/comments.
49
50 FEIR, Chapter 4
51
52 No Commission questions/comments concerning the minor revisions to the DEIR
53
54 FEIR, Chapter 5
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 10
1 Commissioner Sanders: It looks as though the Ukiah Planning Department will be doing all the
2 monitoring as far as making sure the mitigation measures are incorporated and complied with. The City
3 budget over the last few years has resulted in the reduction of staff including the reduction of the
4 workforce in the Planning Department and questions how this project can be properly managed given the
5 constraints. The Planning Department is an enterprise fund that will be able to increase their budget. To
6 this end, has concerns about this issue.
7
8 Planning Director Stump: During the last budget year there were talks with City Council about what
9 would happen if the Costco Project was to occur. The City has the same concerns about capacity issues.
10 The City has authorization from Council to hire another planner if the Costco Project occurs and the
11 appropriate revenue is generated. This new position would assist with the capacity issue should the
12 Costco Project occur and additional work is necessary.
13
14 No further Commission questions/comments.
15
16 FEIR, Chapter 6
17
18 No Commission questions/comments.
19
20 FEIR, Chapter 7
21
22 No Commission questions/comments.
23
24 Appendices and Lost of Tables
25
26 No Commission questions/comments.
27
28 M/S Doble/Christensen to recommend City Council certify the Costco Wholesale Project Environmental
29 Impact Report (EIR), Airport Park Boulevard (File No. 11-1-REZ-SDP-CC-PC and 11-16-EIR-CC based
30 on the Findings in Attachment 1. Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
31
32 AYES: Commissioners Doble, Christensen, Chair Whetzel
33 NOES: Commissioner Sanders
34 ABSENT: Commissioner Pruden
35
36 Break: 8:45 p.m.
37
38 Reconvene: 8:57 p.m.
39
40 9B. Costco Wholesale Project Rezoning and Statement of Overriding Considerations, Airport
41 Park Boulevard (File NO. 11-1-REZ-SDP-CC-PC and 11-16-EIR-CC). Planning Commission
42 consideration and possible recommendation to the City Council to approve a rezoning of the
43 Costco Project site and direction to staff on the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The
44 Project requires City Council approval of a Rezoning and Planning Commission approval of a Site
45 Development Permit to allow construction of a 148,000 square foot Costco Warehouse store and
46 20-pump fueling station, 607 parking spaces, landscaping, and associated site improvements on
47 a 15.33 acre parcel on the east side of Airport Park Boulevard, south of Ken Fowler Auto Center.
48 The rezoning would amend the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Land Use Map to
49 change the land use designation of the Costco Project site from Light Industrial/Mixed Use and
50 Industrial/Auto Commercial to Retail Commercial. Approval of the Project would also require City
51 Council adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the significant and unavoidable
52 Traffic, Air Quality, and Global Climate Change impacts identified in the Costco Wholesale
53 Project EIR.
54
55 Senior Planner Jordan:
56 • Gave a PowerPoint Presentation. (Refer to attachment 7)
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 11
1
2 Commissioner Sanders: Asked for information regarding the status of Lots 2, 3 and 4 related to the
3 proposed rezoning and lot configuration and who owns them. Questioned the protocol for how to go about
4 preserving two of these lots that have wetlands.
5
6 City Attorney Rapport:
7 • The lots are owned by the City of Ukiah Successor Agency, which is a legal and separate entity
8 from the City of Ukiah.
9 • City Council is the governing body of the City of Ukiah Successor Agency.
10
11 Staff provided an aerial map showing the location of wetlands in the Redwood Business Park (included
12 as attachment 8 of these minutes).
13
14 Sage Sangiacomo, Assistant City Manager:
15 • Delineations of the wetlands in the southern portion of the Redwood Business Park had already
16 taken place when the City acquired portions of those parcels at various times. Delineation is the
17 jurisdictional determination that the Army Corps of Engineers makes with regard to wetlands and
18 is good for five years. These jurisdictional determinations are necessary if there are plans for any
19 development within those areas that have been previously identified as wetlands to determine
20 exactly where the wetlands are and how they may have changed over the years.
21 • A study was done by the City to update that wetland delineation in 2009. The study was
22 submitted to the San Francisco Army Corps of Engineers and they issued their jurisdictional
23 determination delineating all the wetlands in those southern parcels. Again, those delineations
24 are good for five years and when these five years expire another jurisdictional determination
25 would have to be made for any development.
26 • Addressed Commissioner Sanders' inquiry about possibly preserving these wetlands allowing for
27 no development and the agencies having decision making authority and these include the
28 Oversight Board and the State Department of Finance. Preservation of these lands could
29 potentially de-value the land which could be considered a `taking." Furthermore, the Oversight
30 Board and the State Department of Finance have the final authority as to whether or not any
31 action/recommendation on the part of the City of Ukiah Successor Agency would actually be
32 valid.
33 • The land is owned by the City of Ukiah Successor Agency, which is a legal and separate
34 governmental agency from the City of Ukiah.
35
36 Commissioner Sanders: Lot 3 has been identified as possible for development. Lots 2 and 4 have
37 wetland properties so those sites could not be developed and inquired what would be the problem with
38 the Council entertaining the discussion about possible preservation.
39
40 Sage Sangiacomo: Will ask Council to evaluate the matter in more detail. Is of the opinion, however, if
41 the concern is to protect the wetlands, the wetlands have been delineated and have all the protection that
42 is afforded by the federal and state government associated with delineated wetlands.
43
44 Commissioner Sanders: The community has lost the entire wetlands in the Redwood Business Park
45 with the Army Corps of Engineers on board so we just have the remaining wetlands. As a part of the City
46 of Ukiah Successor Agency asked if this could be a discussion.
47
48 Sage Sangiacomo: It would be a discussion under the City of Ukiah Successor Agency, Oversight
49 Board and the State Department of Finance. Cannot speak to how these different agencies would act.
50
51 Commissioner poble: Asked if review and discussion could be done later if it was the will of Council to
52 petition to the City of Ukiah Successor Agency to have this discussion down the road.
53
54 City Attorney Rapport:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 12
1 • Is of the opinion, the aforementioned discussion would be a zoning decision. The Council would
2 have to consider what the consequences would be when making such a decision with regard to
3 the City of Ukiah Successor Agency's interest in evaluating the value of the property.
4 • Is concerned with taking action `just off the cuff.'
5 • It would not be wrong to ask the City Council to look into possible preservation of wetland
6 properties with careful evaluation where and how to do this and consider any corresponding
7 consequences that might be associated with such an action. Does not recommend making this
8 decision tonight.
9
10 Chair Wetzel:
11 • The Commission could direct staff to look into possible rezoning of the wetland parcels and come
12 back to the Commission with an action separate from this Project.
13 • Asked how the Commission should proceed with recommending approval of the rezoning of the
14 parcels and direction to staff on how to proceed with Statement of Overriding Considerations.
15
16 Senior Planner Jordan: The Commission would have to determine that the benefits of the proposed
17 Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR to be able to make the
18 rezoning recommendation.
19
20 Commissioner Christensen: Related to the proposed rezoning and lot configuration, asked how we
21 came up with Lots 2, 3, and 4?
22
23 Senior Planner Jordan:
24 • For the non-Costco parcels, City staff determined the number of parcels and configuration of
25 these parcels.
26 • These parcels retained the existing Light Industrial/Mixed Use zoning designation. Only the
27 zoning of the Costco parcel is being changed.
28 • The only considerations related to the rezoning is do the parcels comply with the applicable
29 requirements of the AIP PD ordinance, which is the minimum lot size and length of frontage on
30 Airport Park Boulevard for those parcels with Airport Park Boulevard frontage, and consistency
31 with Airport Compatibility Zone requirements. These aspects are discussed in the staff's analysis
32 as provided for in the staff report for this agenda item.
33
34 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:15 p.m.
35
36 Michael Okuma, Costco:
37 • Commented on some of the benefits of having a Costco in Ukiah and focused primarily on the
38 fiscal benefits related to increased area employmenUwage/benefits and with creating an incentive
39 for people to shop at Costco locally rather than in other communities such as Santa Rosa or
40 Rohnert Park.
41 • Costco provide a good benefits package that includes medical, dental, pharmacy, vision, life,
42 short-term disability, and long-term disability. Costco pays 90% of the cost and the employee
43 pays 10%. Full-time employees are eligible for benefits after 90 days and part-time employees
44 are eligible after 180 days.
45 • Costco provides Eight paid holidays plus three floating holidays.
46 • Costco pays good wages. Some examples of wages, cashiers start at $11.50/hour and after 5
47 years $22.00/hour, industry average after 5 years is $20.00/hour; entry level managers start
48 between $60,000 and $68,000; and senior level managers start at$68,000 to $74,000.
49 • Costco provides a 401(k) 401(k) program with a match from the company and an annual
50 company contribution to the employees 401(k).
51 • The Ukiah Costco would have a mix of full and part time positions with 60% of positions would be
52 full-time and 40% part-time. This split provides the flexibility needed to cover the busier periods,
53 such as weekend and holiday times. Also, the company employs a lot of college student and
54 works with the students schedules.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 13
1 • Costco provides a scholarship program to its employees and employee's children. Have
2 employees graduating from colleges all over the country and the world, including the Air Force
3 Academy, Berkeley, UCLA, Yale, Brown,Waseda in Tokyo.
4 • Costco has low employee turnover rates, 5.8% of employees leave after the first year. The
5 industry average is 20-22%.
6 • For new stores, management is brought in from other stores since experienced managers are
7 needed to get the store up and running and to ensure its success. There is the possibility for
8 Ukiah area residents to work as managers at the Ukiah store since there are managers at the
9 Sonoma County Costco's that live in the Ukiah area. Since the Ukiah Costco is not an approved
10 project, the positions have not yet been advertised internally.
11
12 William Kopper:
13 • Related to the proposed Rezoning and Statement of Overriding Considerations, his clients do not
14 support approval of the Project for the reasons that the Project will have approximately a quarter
15 of a mile of a parking lot clearly visible to US 101, which is designated in the Ukiah General Plan
16 as a scenic corridor. The building is essentially a cement block and not aesthetically pleasing.
17 The City required the Walmart store be screened with confers so this requirement should be
18 applied to Costco as well so overtime the store would be sufficiently screened from view.
19 • Another Project issue concern is the lighting in the parking lot. According to the Illuminating
20 Engineers Society(IES), the proposed lighting is about five times the lighting that is necessary for
21 such a parking lot. The parking lot is very highly lit which is a waste of energy, but more than this
22 for the residents in the surrounding hillsides would create a visual blinding blight. It also would
23 harm wildlife. Supports the City impose lighting restrictions on the lighting of the parking lot as a
24 condition of approval.
25 • Agrees with what has been said on behalf of his clients about having a gas station in the
26 proposed location. Clearly there is not a shortage of gas sales in the City of Ukiah. The gas
27 station will add to the air pollution impacts as well as impacts to traffic. Supports a condition of
28 approval that eliminates the gas station from the Project.
29 • Is of the opinion the FEIR and/or the supporting documents do not adequately show this project is
30 consistent with the Ukiah General Plan.
31
32 Commissioner poble: Asked Attorney Kopper if his clients reside in Ukiah and if they are present
33 tonight.
34
35 Attorney Kopper: Confirmed his clients reside in Ukiah and they are not present tonight.
36
37 Sage Sangiacomo: Related to the parcel formerly referred to as the Langley Pond that is included in the
38 long range property management plan as part of the dissolution of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency that
39 has to be submitted to the State and has been submitted, the City of Ukiah Successor Agency and
40 Oversight Board have requested this parcel be retained for governmental use. The recommendation has
41 been made with regards to the Langley property that this land be retained for governmental use. Not only
42 is a portion of this delineated as wetlands, but the City's main sewer trunk line runs through that parcel
43 (Parcel2).
44
45 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:27 p.m.
46 Commissioner Christensen:
47 • Related to the public comment about bringing in management from outside of the area, asked if
48 Costco would be hiring local persons into management positions?
49 • Do you have information on how many Costco employees presently commute from Ukiah to work
50 at other Costco stores?
51 • Related to the Costco Fiscal Impact Analysis document, requested clarification about the
52 information in the document that estimates 18,000 plus memberships with Ukiah addresses when
53 Ukiah has an estimated population of under 16,000.
54
55 Michael Okuma, Costco:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 14
1 • Costco promotes people from within. To make certain the warehouse is successful
2 managemenUsenior management must be experienced, so they come from other Costco stores.
3 There are Ukiah area residents that are managers at other Costco stores in Santa Rosa and
4 Rohnert Park. The Ukiah Costco store would allow these managers to work at the Ukiah Costco
5 store, so there could be managers at the Ukiah Costco that are Ukiah residents.
6 • Does not have information about the number of persons commuting from the Ukiah area to work
7 at the Santa Rosa or Rohnert Park Costco stores.
8 • The 18,000 plus membership figures represent the greater market area, not just the City but the
9 greater market area that the store will serve.
10
11 Chair Whetzel:
12 • Do Costco employees that are forklift operators and warehouse stockers have in-house safety
13 training?
14 • Is there different pay different job descriptions?
15 • Does Costco have a drug testing program?
16
17 Michael Okuma, Costco:
18 • Every warehouse staff receives training.
19 • The level of their salary/wage depends on the individual job description.
20 • Confirmed Costco has a drug testing program.
21
22 Commissioner poble:
23 • Aside from what was stated in the presentation of the staff report, what element struck him the
24 most was the market area created by the proposed Costco opportunity. What is interesting is that
25 the potential for people to come to Ukiah who ordinarily would not is much greater with the market
26 area and the manner in which it is laid out. It may be that someone has a weekend house on the
27 coast and lives in the Bay Area so instead of stopping in Santa Rosa to shop he/she may actually
28 stop in Ukiah to shop on the way over to the coast. It may be that people who live on the coast
29 will choose to shop in Ukiah as opposed to traveling to Santa Rosa and possibly stay the night
30 and take advantage of other opportunities Ukiah has to offer. He sees this as a benefit that was
31 not really stated in the discussion. The fact there is the potential for schools/Ukiah Unified School
32 District, Mendocino College, Mendocino County Office of Education and Mendocino County to
33 share in the revenues that would be generated with Costco being located in Ukiah is really
34 something. All in all as a resident here and as a parent who has young children and who enjoys
35 the Downtown cannot seem to draw a conclusion that the Project is harmful to the community.
36 • One point to remember is that there is a mitigation measure that would not allow occupancy of
37 the building until the interchange improvements have been approved/completed. This is
38 information that is important for the record in terms of our findings because of the issues that
39 have been brought about relative to safety/level of service. The community already understands
40 that the Highway 101/Talmage interchange operates at a level that is currently inadequate
41 regardless of what occurs in the Redwood Business Park now or in the future.
42
43 Chair Whetzel: Concurs with Commissioner poble's statements. Also shares the same concerns
44 expressed by Attorney Kopper. These are concerns that will definitely be looked at by the Planning
45 Commission as part of the Site Development Permit. Has the same concerns since resides in Ukiah,
46 drives that section of the highway related to Highway 101/Talmage interchange, and has concerns about
47 potential lighting impacts since he lives in a residential neighborhood just north of the Redwood Business
48 Park.
49
50 Commissioner Christensen: An associated benefit for approval of the Statement of Overriding
51 Considerations is if all those little parcels are kept overtime we could potentially have a whole bunch of
52 different businesses that are not going to be as responsible as Costco that would not pay their employees
53 or provide benefits to their employees that are as good as the wages and benefits provided by Costco.
54 By taking control now and rezoning the parcels to allow for a Costco, the City would be taking control of
55 the types of jobs created rather than leaving the land undeveloped for an uncertain future.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 15
1
2 M/S Doble/Christensen to recommend the City Council adopt the Statement of Overriding
3 Considerations in accordance with provisions outlined in Attachment 1 and to recommend approval of the
4 Rezoning as provided for in the staff report. Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
5
6 AYES: Commissioners Doble, Christensen, Chair Whetzel
7 NOES: Commissioner Sanders
8 ABSENT: Commissioner Pruden
9
10 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
11
12 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
13
14 12. ADJOURNMENT
15 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:42 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2013
Page 16
���������r�t �� '
11f22J2013
Costco Wholesale Project
Fina) Environmental Impact Report
���� ��� ������� '
���:�r��r�i��� �`�r�����i�;�i��� '
���r����r����° ���., ��,����
�it �.,ial� '
.
4$�+ ,#, � �`$��
1"OJ2C� � °� ��� � � �`
�,, � . � �� �
,
� � ���� �, ��,��� "a�
Location � � �� � � '�
�, � � � ��
t�� �� �. ���t
� � ��.
,� ; ��
a
`���� �.r ��' �
(� .
��
� r' ' �s
�%^�..._. �� ���h
�� � �
,�, �
,. E� �: r .����` �� ��
_.<� -��U�.� � �
' `,y � � '�. , . dg� �� ..
U� �`"� �° S ��� g �� �p�§
T � �74s
� �
i ��
Ya! "� �"' � a?�:�
�
� . x �TRO E, �, � 1� "
�i 7Map M 3 i
PRUJECT LOCAT(17N � ��
°p i � � tiY
. �p ' `- ..: � .
,/ t � �" ` 3�� � �
,t '— J ",�� " ,» at. ��
� $§`
�» g
_�,• tm ���� � � .,.
�� . '���� ..:,,.
x .
� ��
�.. .,1� ~� � �� �� �Y;>' .
.� ��,.� � � ,
. ( .. . . ." : �� �. �., .. . ... E .,.:..rr �'L.. ,'`!t` ,,. ,. . .,
1 '
za./ZZ��a1�
Praposed Project
• Characteristics • Genera) Plan Designation:
— 148,OOOSF Warehouse Master Plan Area
— Fuef station, 16J20 pumps • Zaning: Airport Industrial
— 15.33-acre site Park— Planned '
— 175—200 employees Development
— Hours M-F 10:00 am—8:30 • �ity Entitlements
pm; Sa 9:30 am—6:00 pm;
Su 10:Q0 am—6:Q0 pm — Zoning Amendment: Retail
Commercial
— Site Development Permit !
— �ot Line Adjustment
{consolidation)
Proposed Project
• Additional Project • Potential Offsite
Entitlements Entitlements
— ALUCP Consistency — Caltrans Encroachment
Determination (Interchange and U.S.
— RWQCB NPDES 101 Drainage ROW)
(construetion) — CDFW Streambed
— MCAQMD �arge Project Alteration (Drainage) '
Grading Permit — USACE (Drainage)
— California ABC License — RWQCB (Drainage:water '
— County Environmental quality certification}
Health Department
2
a.s/2z/2a1�
Proposed Project
"r �;" , ����e,
� �s�
tf � I k� . 7§F 4„�S$K 1 G. ....
¢'2,.�; �ae�c«� ek€a'�.��- 3 i�f s�a xa t.�,�: ,n.y i`�:` ..
�ti
.,. . ta=�'�„„d: ..,..
;
�,,,,.��>��.`��b.,�^;�"., � ��.ii �.,. � ...
6l.9TElEVF1WN . . � �y.� . . . . •.. . .
�. . .. � ... ... . ....
..F ,... - ...„G*., ,;..� � ....Lw�..�: w......�.�... �.
x .... � .. �..., �rt. ! [A O ,t .:Sx .
' .,.,.,. ..,.._.. ...«w.. ...... ..... . .
.
� '°' �. '� �lQ. r!' ��
''.. �.:.. .. , �� �
��� � '���
„.,,..,� ` ��� �
�n���� � t, ��
�`� z;; �
�.,,;.�
: .. p
� ��� � , .,�� � i . ,., ��,f ;_
1'
� ,� �� �
� �
r ��:
��«w,��.-,ab °
Environmental Impact Report Process
Nov-Dec 2011 Jan-Feb 2013 November 2013
3
(
s�./�2/zos�
;
;
Scoping
• Notice of Preparation issued Nov. 7, 2011
• 6 comment letters received
Draft EIR
• Notice of Availability January 30, 2013
� Public Nearing February 27, 2013 '
�► 73 comment lett�rs rec�ived
— 4 agency letters
— 69 public cornment letters '
4
1SJ22f2013
Final EIR
• Issued November 1, 2013
• C011tents
— Comments and List af Commenters
— Responses to Comments !
• Master Responses '
• Individual Responses to Environmentai Issues
— Minor Revisions to the Draft EIR
— Additional Information '
• Correspandence
• Drainage Plan and Hydraulics Study
Master Responses
• Aesthetics
— Includes Visual 5im�fations and Additianal
Performance Measures for LightjGlare Mitigatian
• Landscaping
— visual '
— Shade Requirements
— Energy CanservationjUrban Heat Island '
• Fiscal Impact Analysis
5
zz/zz/za1�
Master Responses
• Traffic
— Potentially Significant Impacts
—Talmage j U.S. 101 Improvements
• Funding
• Significant and Unavoidable
• Drainage
— Water Quality --
— Fuel Station
— Drainage
Master Responses
• Urban Decay Analysis
� Economic vs. Environmental Effects
—Automotive and "Qther" Retail
5
11j22/2013
�01'1'111'11SSIQ�1 ACt1UC1S
• Pravide Recommendations to Council
— Certification of the EIR
— Zoning Amendrnent
— Direction to staff on SOCjProject Benefits
• Site Development Permit will return far
Commissian action
— Potential approval would rely on Council-certified '
EIR
Certificatian Findings
• The City Council must find that
—The Final EIR has been completed in complianc�
with the California Environmental Quality Act
iCE�A)�
—The Final EIR was presented to the Council, and ;
the Cauncil has reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final EIR; and
— The Final EIR reflects the City of Ukiah's '
independent judgment and analysis. '
�
11f22j2Q13
CEQA Findings
• Prior to project approval, findings must be
made far each significant impact.
� For any significant and unavoidable
Standard of Adequacy of ar� EIR
*An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of
analysis to provide decision makers with information which '
enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes
account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of
the environmental effects af a proposed project need not be
exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in
the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among
experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should
summarize the main points of disagreement among the
experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for
adequacy, compIeteness,,and a good faith effort at full
disclosure.—CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15151
*CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every '
recommended test and perform all recommended researeh '
to evaluate the impacts of a proposed project -Association
of Irritated Residents v. County of Madera (2Q03) 107
Cal.App.4th 2383
8
���� �tm�€�# # -�-
Ukiah Planning Commission DE������
1�
Re: Costco final EIR NOV 21 2013
c�n►o� t�
Dear Commissioners:
�►� nE�:
Please consider these suggestions as possibilities which I believe would greatly improve the
COSTCO project and reduce the environmental impacts:
Air Quality. The EIR rightly states that the project will cause Significant Impacts on air
quality. However, the mitigation measures offered are trivial and are measures that the
project sponsor would do anyway. The EIR states that the impacts on air quality are
Unavoidable. That is because they fully expect ttie City to state that there are overriding '�
considerations.
Knowing how substantial these impacts are, the city should require that the project be down-
sized and that measures be taken to reduce vehicie trips and especially, truck trips. There is
also the growth inducement factor of such a large store. the Costco store shouid be smaller
than the existing Walmart store to avoid growth inducement. Square footage should be
removed from the Costco store that would reduce its environmental impacts. One way to
reduce square footage is to remove the tire store, a use which causes some of the major
impacts and contributes to Climate Change by encouraging vehicle use and an astounding
number of truck trips to deliver new and take away old tires.
Transportation and Traffic. The most serious Mitigation Measure is the Talmage Road
Interchange Improvements and it is clear that the City is energetically pursuing an improved
interchange which requires state agency approvals and funding to be provided, The
mitiaation measure should be rewritten to allow no approval of Costco construction aermits
until the work on the interchanqe is substantiallv completed sav 85% comqleted. If the :City
issued permits for a Costco store to be built, it is unlikely that the City would then hold up the
opening of the store, after it is all built and they are awaiting just a certificate of occupancy.
Alternatives. In addition to the "Costco store without Gasoline Stations" Alternative,
please add another Alternative called "Costco store without Gasoline Stations or Tire Store".
While there is no way to totally eliminate the Significant Impacts from the proposed project or
the IVo Gas Stations Alternative , the most severe impacts of both the Traffic Increases and
the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions would be greatly reduced .
The Final EIR should make the declaration that there would be a substantial reduction in both
the Traffic and GHG impacts, which are classified as SU (significant, unavoidable) . The effect
of the reductions could be considerable but we will never know unless the current document
sets down numbers that quantify the reductions. The absence of these numbers in the EIR
. trivializes the Atternative , thus making it unlikely that the Alternative will be seriously .
considered.
,
Wetland (Hydrology). Mitigation measures should be included thaf would restore a
functioning wetland as an offset for paving over so much originaf land fihat was never before
paved or impervious, covered over. Another mitigation measure should require that at least
20 or 25% of the pavement shouid be made of pervious material to allow natural drainage to
the ground to take place.
Aesthetics. Although Costco has made a special design at the store entry, it is obvious
that the store will look like all the other Costco stores and does not respond to the special
character of the Ukiah Valley which still can be appreciated from the unbuilt siteThe massive
white wall panels, the red stripe and the conventional signage do no credit to Ukiah. Where
exactly are they "using local materials"? The building design and its conformity to the brand - -
has created a building that lacks of aesthetic distinction should be considered an impact that
requires mitigation. An appropriate mitigation would be to require a specialized massing and
design of this building that does justice to the special character of Ukiah in its valley setting. .
Improve and correct mitigation measures. Mitigation measures should address
directly the actual impacts. Those mitigation measures which the city would require anyway
as part of project approval are not specific mitigations which address the impacts of this
particular project. The same set of mitigations should not be used again to offset several :
types of impacts, that is, to be used twice or more to offset impacts. For example, Mitigation
Measures 3.2.2 a-c , which are used to offset several sets of impacts. Also note that while
Mitigation Measures 3.2.2 a-c are just three, the text refers to a-d and there is no fourth
mitigation , no "d".
Summarizing, I believe that the project Alternative called "Costco store without Gasoline
Stations" and additionally, "without tire store" is the best one for Ukiah and would
clearly result in much fower environmental and economic impacts. It is the
environmentally Superior Alternative ; the Commission should improve it by making workable
and worthy mitigation measures so that you can later choose a project that has merit.
While it is true that even the Alternative has imqacts and would reauire a statement of
overridinq considerations, so be it. The imqacts would be lessened and the mitigation
measures would still aqplv, aivinq us an environmentallv less harmful proiect. Cutting ba�k
such a huge project would not be a deal-breaker; there is no deal until these hearings are all
completed.
Please remember that this is the Citv's propertv and it is in a verv real sense Public Land.
You are fully within your rights through CEQA to substitute this alternative in place of the
Proposed Project when the time comes.
Mary Anne Miller, Ukiah November 21 , 2013
` �i�C�t:�i�,��t��lf �' °`
i •
� s tat� on � az � r s
• • � i • . � ... . . � .
• over � r� durin tankfillin
� � ,
.
o era� or� s
p
i • • � �. � � .... . � .� . .... � .. � � . .
� J�i � S � � � � � � � r
� � �
v
custom � � -
s
� r
� ���1a �
, �
�� (f�.� d���ip�,{ . . ... . ...
� `x e,r='j ;
� � .
s
ai , x �. . . .. .. .
. � � � , :, . . . � .
`uy ..�. . r '�:, x . . . .
i � ��;,���
`�'� �` " . '° 'i. �`� �} �a,"}s`"`�15'� �'�yl . �? 41�kY . . .
� �� � � � �. � .
�4`�.s'�4�, � tys '�;�L�,+a '°� : 5� ,��R tiU4�y � wr�`��� tz�,e`�.. k . ' . . � .
���..,.... ,.. , . , �, ��
`����`¢"+����1���at��,',�:�',�.lt�� ' zS � � .
�����.� ����,.���v : .. ..
����� ������s��s���a���`���s�����,,
j y ,, �
�,���
t �xd�z, i
!�s�� �`°�1"tS,u�: � �' � �'�,.�' . .
�'� �'° ' ����; t
y� 3 � �?a�y�ti��
a
i t ����, .. . . .. .. .
a �
0�
, , �.'�' , � . � � �
�� ��f .°; �
� �m�.
t
�,�„� _�. � � � �
� w, .
.,FwW< � �� �<
�. ; ; �, ,
:
. _ ,�.� � �. �„ - �
; � � §
a ka i � ,.
�.,w.:v.esi,�..,,..,:.. . . . .. .. .
w ..N-� z,ti ���,�, � � .. . . . . .
}. —
�'��� ��, t, � ,... ;; �
_ ,
..,,,� � �: ,
� M � ��3�p���� a.-, �.., .=„ . . . . . .._� .
� r
Y��� � I9
��� °' � ��.,�
,_.,,.,.. �. �t �,s; �
� � ���
� t e� � t �� ��" '.°y
,. <. T� ?Y, , �4 C . . ..
� 2 E` � ..... .... .... . ...... .....
��2 :` ... ... .
+. i
�
�
�
.b `s ti \t6�s ,� �� \: Y � . .. � . .
�
� �.
� �� ��� � ,
s� �`�� ,�, ` �''`��'1� '' �� � �
�k Ii
;� �� � �� ,���_
� ° u
� �� � ����fw��x �� ,�r."�G �x � �
,,. � ��,
� � �: �
G�s�a��l i n� t�r�����s �h��m��� ��I�r � � � �
s� es
�►3 ft lon 2-3 trucks da
�� v
il;
y
� ��' ' ��" �� ��
. , �
� ,. �
,��,�k '� . � .
y r'
k ", w
+
w
u ���` ;�uz�« � � _
�_„
� r� . . a ,.a
. �
� ���
Y a
����_. rr....�t„ �.. . ��
�,' �� I �I� I I � �;i ; .
iP� � � I ,s�iill�� I I 'i�� C ' , � �� �
�p�� � � , �,�� �
��� �i V I � � �� � �
� �
� ti.�,
Y�
I� � �
,,
i „ + � �� � .
�� i�����V��R`+��1���I� ° � �
' _
The EIR states: Signi�icant � lJnavoidable Impacts:
All� t�l1A�ITY, TI�A�FIC, CLIMATE CHANGE
Without the gas station, the impac�s are less.
• •
rans ortat�on ar�d ra c
l�
"The elimir�at�'on o the uelin sta�i'on
.� f �
wo uld eiim in a te a roxim a tel 492
�� Y
v�hi�le t�i s car the eak h�ur."
� � �
8.2 ca rs m i n ute d rivi n i nto th e Castco
/ , �
I�t is si r�ifi�� nt�
�
O • • i . ..... ... .�.. .� .. ... ...
vera re uc� on i r� e � issior� s
"The overall reduct�"on in. . . v/lu�i'on emissians
p
waul d be 25-3C�°o com ared to the Pro/'ect. "
! � ,!
U�/ I t� t�1 C' c� S Stc�t1 t� I''1 � �1 r * °
e e �iII be 4� ,/
� �
alr� �st hal� � h '
� s uc , � � r+� ol I �� � n �
� �
si r� ific� r�� ir�cr�e� se in � nViror� � r�t I
� e �
b � rd � r� �
I )
�
� AN � E
�> C��►stca �i��► � s s���ior�
Ernissic� n � in � r�� s� = 3�°��4��
=� 4� 2 � +� �+� �� rs �� � � � � r �
�
� . � � �► re �� rs er � ir� �t�
�
1�� � �� s��� � r� �� r� � . .
b s � � � o� �� c� r��
�
� r��i �c� n � � nt� I b � r�der� .
J i . !
.
N c�e���c� -
S� n Fr� nciscc�
F�s�er �i�y
H�yv��rd
�c�� r�t� i r� �/i�w
S� n Jc�s�
R�s��i I I�
�� lir��s
R�dd i r��
I ;, I ,
���_ , .�
, � Po�i.
���" �,�p
.. ..
� t ,.... �' ..�� �,t, . ., ,� .= y
� � r
v
�.� S, � � � f �w�ls'`w.��r��`.4 7 ,a ' �... : �.. .. .� .. �� .:..
� �y � ' � � . .. �
� � , .
�,,.,,��-� . e` � , , , � �
� �U � � � �
„ . .,d. , � , ,�
� .�
, �
} �
,
�;. ' ����` �
-�:
� �' � _ _ _
., ,
e� .
s
c
; `
� ',„� �
�
4�� ,� �
�� t}�Iti��wt�Vr fr"��'diti9����'`������,����z��
lI���4�,i
� r
Elimin�te the � � � �� '
gas sta�ion .
=�:'
� ���� Letter I56
�::f`I`L:
�� I . �
,_;:; ,, t��"!'�� �19Y1�?Plt �
�
�+i ,:
Kim Jordan
i
From: Marlene Shupe <ukiahpaper@sbcglobai. net>
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 2: 59 PM ,
Subject: costo application
�EL���Rri�l� 30 '���RS SF�1lIN�a i'h�� i��aV!l�f�D �O�PiR�
, v - . ' - • F
,�t ' ,; � , � � .
� � � � a� 4 , Y " �
, ; , � . b , >
. . , , � ' � �
j � r �`
• p �� �} )�
� C � K � �r M �
. .� r n . lt f r D> ^'' i� d. �,� �f`� '' a . �f �`� ti'� +y- y� s '.�{ r1?� +�� �q }"}
. {r f�M1 .� �� M t! 'P ��e s ce -.�� � >�x5#ityr� v .n n i "3 �t w )�'S �� S�tf F ( Yt + y
S..F 3� I I � n 1 `.�{i yt i � "� t yiej�i wJ
�x . ' .� �.!hy '^r �a i . ,:�,.�;.�ds.�c�, rs -e i�° � � �i.t#,; xi��"�i�i? �' �- f'`.T i w„ � 5 '� d
� t� Fyy��� . ra�: Y � 'lj9G � o'� � ��T� S i �;i� s �feYl# �`�'� r . .i,� "l � Y��: r��ye � �f��}'< f �t '�r+L,v' �!' � . 'I^ry„ �'.
: { �� ' ` � � 'Z� ���� ������� ��,� �'r� '�,���� • � '�� .��h�•��a�t2�1''���� ����1� � �y .
, �
, , � � ��` t
, ,�; ; T , � a � , � :. . . . , , � _ � :,� > � ::� , t �c�:
,
. , ,..,. . . ,, ..: , >
r _ _ 1
x
,
�� �
i; ' -
� Dear City of Ukiah Council & Planning Commission,
;
' WHY ARE WE (City of Ukiah) IN THE SPECULATION OF REAL ESTATE BUSINESS??? This is THE CORE OF THE
� ISSUE. Since THE FOOLISH DECISION TO BUY REAL ESTATE WITH SPECULATION of selling to Costco with
taxpayer $$ was made, more $$ down the "rabbit hole" is NOT the answer. The city needs to govern and make POLICY
� to determine the future development of Ukiah, not CONTINUE TO SPEND more TAXPAYER DOLLARS �O BENEFIT
Costco OR ANY OTHER big box business.
/ These past and ongoing actio�s to be a part of the REAL ESTATE SPECULATION business has been an affront to local
I businesses who PAY local taxes �nd get NO benefit from this. In fact, many would be negatively impacted to the point of
ruin.
If Costco wants to come to Ukiah, let THEM make the necessary improvements to the roads and act like ANY OTHER
� DEVELOPER who wants to build within the city limitsl �
A(ong the same lines, there should be NO MORE BORROWING to compound the bad decisions already made. Either sell 1
the property to Costco or anyone eise outright and get out of the real estate market, or portion off to smaller business--but
� NO borrowing to accommodate out of the area business interests. They should have to live by the same laws other
developers do & PAY for all improvements in addition to the land WITH TMEIR MONEY.
Let the City of Ukiah go back to what they were elected to do, govern its citizens, NOT SPECULATE IN REAL ESTA7E
� and live within our buget.
Use our local redevelopment $ to improve the roads, sidewalk construction (2013 & NO sidewalks in much of Ukiah! ! I )
sewer lin�s, parks, community buildings & other LOCAL infrastrucfure that effects ALL of Ukiah & those who live here,
� NOT just special interest groups & out of Town Big sOX Corporations ! !
Enough is enoughl
Sincerely,
Marlene Shupe, Pres/C. F.O. , Ukiah Paper Supply, Inc.
�
�
,� i
�
�� 2-337
i
i �i �,it��� ��n��t #
-----_____
i
- --- I �i_�,-� ia G ���/� �ann; �xn►� c�s �� _ _ ��_�� _lem ����(3 ,
�
� war� �o e��Prress m y_���er�� f�. �x,o��af�'�� --
_ �7�Gr"�CaSt� W ��� _�fb�ase� l.cf5�� P��• � ��14fs t1 is V��d +r 'a�hiqq
r"' J
-i0 0. � �o�W ���nq l�aL 7a th� aMdur ` � 7 Y'a �w l�khne� / » 7 d 0. � Chd .
� �,
— �t�----- --- — 1 �-- f �
p�¢.�� 7 ►�S S ) z�i .�� �'tJ'a i'��o 2x a�srar, W � 7 � ho m :�'�qoTron rov"rd � _
6 �� �
� .— _— � �( �C1 (5 'GtdiGr� S_�!�._S��.�_. _ � / m , � P C ��—�1�311118r3 qt� � ! / _ya�� T
C v �9
J
?�qj!'�_u�a�e�Pr_r,qv�'n�t�it�to� C►'���%� w f� rou,.�� � rw�F, � sa�u �,A, . �'
v �l --' U
----- ��e�cS,ri �a no� a � �rsW �'� ts �a _q_a �� roctq,� W � f�o�v� a So a,�ti ern -- —
U J —
- --- --Gl cc2�s ►''o a�—�-«qr�S_s_:�?q iress . -- - ---- --------- — — --
�i v � .�/j� •
------ - ---- ----- �:J�y/ I -- - --
—__- -- - ---- -- - --- - —._ — ��in � � la�h�e�1-- - ----------- --------
--- -� -------- -- - -�l ���s�. -------- __ _
_-- -- -- -- -------- --- -- -���a� - ---- - -------
_ _ _____ ______ ______ -_- ���r�-'�_________ . -
�
- - --- - ----- ---- — _ ---- �o� 12013 __ ._- --------—
- -- - --- -------------------- — �� ---- -- ---
cmr oF
— ---- -- ----- ----------- - -- -----�A1+INING-DEPL . __ ---- -----
�fitca�hm�nt # ��
Redwood Business Park formerlv the Airport lndustrial Park Wetlands
The reader of the COSTCO EIR will find limited information about the adjacent
wetlands to the south and no information about the historic wetlands to the north
of the proposed site . The disappeared wetlands are lost but it's the remaining
wetlands that are under consideration in evaluating the project operation and its
compatibility with wetland habitat in the future . Finally what will happen to the
remaining vacant parcels that have wetlands onsite?
A local journalist, Linda Williams' wrote a timely piece about wetlands in context
with the Caltrans 101 Bypass construction project in Willits . It was carried in the
Willits News and ran in the UDJ (5/8/11 ) . In her article , " Wetlands mitigation: A
spotiy history . " Williams wrote that the wetland mitigation record and how
regulators responsible for monitoring mitigation sites have lost track of mitigation
projects for wetlands around the state . This was newsworthy at the #ime and is
relevant now as we review tMe CO�TCO EIR . � � -
Williams sourced the US Geological Survey about the loss of historic wetlands.
Historically, the US has incentivized filling in wetlands for development and
growth that has led to a 50% loss of wetlands from 1780 to 1980. In CA we have
been so successful in destroying wetlands that we h�ave eradicated 81 % of the
states' wetlands. US wetland destruction has been at the pace of nearly 800, 000
acres per year prior to 1954; this dropped off to about 80,000 acres per year from
1982 to1992 because of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 . This
change was driven by an increasing awareness that wetlands provide valuable
habitats for wildlife , enhance water quality, control soil erosion and flooding , and
provide other general benefits to society. Wetlands are considered among the �
earth's most productive ecosystems with many fish and wildlife populations
relying upon them for food and habitat. Most scientists now agree that wetland
eradication is one of the root causes for the decline of many species of wildlife
. with nearly half of all federally listed threatened and endangered species
dependent upon wetlands during some part of their life cycle .
What does this have to do with the COSTCO Proiect?
.,
From 1978 on wetlands in RBP have been viewed as a nuisance to development
(See Photo Map 1978) . Over the years statements have been made about the
mitigated wetlands versus "real" or "natural wetlands" and the controversy
surrounding a rare wetland native plant, Baker's meadowfoam that was
discovered , reported to the regulators, and litigated about during the pre and post
W�Imart development of the 1990s .
Of course this happened a long time ago . The parties involved in the litigation
moved away, passed on , filled in the wetlands, developed their properties .
Parcels were later consolidated and sold to the City of Ukiah and the whole affair
was forgotten by most people .
The 1992 Walmart Store and Amendment to the Airport Industrial Park Planned
Development DEIR and FEIR by Leonard Charles and Associates and the CA
Department of Fish and Game letter dated 2/24/ 1992 to the City of Ukiah
Planning Division provides some historical background as to the wetlands .
When the original Walmart store was proposed for development a lawsuit was
filed in 1990 against the City of Ukiah by the Mendocino Environmental Center
objecting to a mitigated negative declaration process instead of a full EIR for the
Walmart Store and Airport Industrial Planned Development. In February 1990
the City Planning Commission approved a Negative Declaration and Site
Development Permit for the Store on the northeasternmost parcel of the
Redwood Business Park. This action was appealed and the appeal was rejected
by the City Council .
Three appellants then filed for a Petition for Writ of Mandate and Injunctive Relief
in March of 1990 . A second petition was filed in April 1990 . The petitioners
claim was that there had been several violations of State law in approving and
amending the Use Permits . In a Stipulation to Dismiss Actions, SetAside
Decision and Remand for Further Prcoeedings, " attorneys for all parties involved
with the case agreed to settle the case in July 1990 .
One of the four stipulations was , "RBP investors would enter into a reasonable
mitigation agreement with the Department of Fish and Game to preserve or
mitigate the habitat for the loss of the Baker's meadowfoam plant on Redwood
Business Park. " The Department of Fish and Game required specific conditions
be met before the construction of the Walmart project. Finally in 1995 off-site
mitigations were agreed to in the Willits area .
During the environmental review many comments and correspondence was
received from property owners and others attesting that there were no historic
wetlands in this area and that they were created unnaturally when 101 was
constructed .
Leonard Charles and Associates in the 1992 Walmart EIR wrote ,
The naturalness of a wetland has no bearing on whether an area functions
as a wetland and meets the wetland criteria . . . the drainage patterns were
largely intact until filled in in 1978 . . . the fact that these areas were avoided
and referred to as "seasonally flooded" and "wet" by longterm residents
indicates the site had wetland aspects . Construction of the freeway would
have little effect on the wetlands. The drainage patterns may have
truncated or altered by the freeway but would have had to cut off most
water to the site in order to eliminate wetland hydrology.
The last remaining wetlands bordering the COSTCO site meet the definition of
wetlands . In the Kleinfelder Initial Limited Phase 1 Environomental Site
Assessment for COSTCO prepared by CJ Hull , J Parsons and PA Wee , dated
12/9/11 (Appendix C , Pg 2 of 53) concluded ,
That the adjacent off-site creek has wetland properties and
therefore some pre-construction and construction activities will
likely be requied by state and local regulatory agencies . . . There
were several existing drains observed that discharge to the creek
and to to the drainage separating the site from Highway 101 .
The 1992 Walmart EIR provides historical context for the Planning Commission 's
task in making recommendations to City Council for certifying the environmental
document and the proposed changes to the RBP . Consider the following
information found in the Walmart EIR :
• The 138 acres of the Airport Indusrial Park formerly Redwood Business Park
lies on the edge of the western flood plain of the Russian River. AIPs
drainage patterns have been altered by the construction of the railroad tracks
and highway 101 . The historic wetlands of this area have been filled in for
development and . . . . with the remaining wetlands found in the southern end
of the AI P .
• The vegetation and Wildlife of the area setting of the AIP site as , being
extensively modified following years of agricultural use and historic filling of
wetlands . The EIR added that along the very southern edge of the RBP
several large valley oaks , willows , ash and other trees were present. In 1992
the document further elaborated from a 1952 aerial photo the area once
included 8 . 6 acres of wetlands on the RBP site and back then were
connected to a swale/channel located immediately south of RBP .
• The biotic environment in the development of the AIPPD will result in further
filling of wetlands on the site . This filling would eliminate a valuable biotic
resource , that is , vernal wetlands , as well as a population of Baker's
meadowfoam , a State-listed rare plant. Both of these impacts are considered
significant adverse impacts . The document included a wetland mitigation and
restoration plan to preserve and restore wetlands and the Baker's
meadowfoam colony. If this mitigation plan is required and implemented ,
then these impacts will be mitigated .
• Buildout of the AIPPD will result in the loss of over 130 acres of open space
that is used by wildlife . Development may also result in the loss of mature
valley oaks in the southern portion of the Industrial Park. Restoration of site
wetlands will partially mitigate the loss of wildlife habitat; landscaping
mitigations are also recommended to mitigate this impact. This EIR
recommends preservation of mature oaks wherever feasible .
• Mitigation Measures referred to in the EIR are : To mitigate RBP project
drainage impacts the following mitigations should be implemented :
Set aside and restore a portion of the site that currently exhibits wetland
characteristics . Restoration of vernal pool wetland and possible the
historic riparian habitat on the project site would reduce the project impact
on this habitat to a level of insignificance . A conceptual restoration design
is described under the mitigation measures heading of the Vegetation and
Wildlife Section of this EIR . . . all recommended mitigation measure shall be
monitored by the Ukiah Department of Public Works .
What will happen to the last remaining wetlands? They are part of a significant
drainage area in the business park. What development plans does the City of
Ukiah have for these wetlands on currently vacant properties?
Linda Sanders
11 /21 /13
.���.,':��f����
����`":��. ���t�"��$ ��
.� � .� .
. �, � � ,� � . . � � . a � „ M
z�ir-part.Parlc:��3�2Ie�-ai c1 '
:1irp�t-t inclustt-ial Paz-lc �1a�1nec3 I�e�clo�arne��t
�°��������'��� ���������°����
l��z�nin�
Site �ev�l c����nt P�rmit
Fa�°��1 cc�nsalidation and re��nfigug°ati�n
_
1
�z/z2/2o��
� 1
❑General Plan: Master P1an Area
�Zoning:Airport Industrial Park Planned Development
C�Existing Zaning Land Lise Designations:
Industrial/Auto Commcrcial
Light Manufacturing/Mixed LIse '
�Proposed�oning Land Lise L)esignation: �
Retail Commercial
Rezoning Exhibit
ExistingZoning&�atCo�figuration �
��o�
,.�J -- ��««�„a�,,�,�a�,��
a�+ '�$� an�.acoMUexeu
� ��!y
.�«'p� Y t %l�+k�f
,'""� t t }`�. ,�. .�
..... �+� 4�� ++ai�,7'.
�-� ,..s4`„..�t,f^i '�b .S<t> # .
[.xe'.rwcmrexu&mr Ww�cuu�ra� .
Proposed Zoning&Lot Configuration
�___-- - '
.__�
� �' �� . �
�
:
�;� ,�.,�
__. ,�� �
�����«,�«,�,�, �
� EXISTING AND PROPOSED 20NIP1G EXHIBIT ��'�s��
�
11j22/2013
i ifi� � � i i I c�
❑Traffic:Existing, Near-Term and Future Conditions ��ith
Project for Queuing and Level of Service
�Air Quality: Qperational and Gumulative due to mobile
sources
�Global Climate Change: Operational Greenhouse gas '
emissions
�� ��� � ������ �������
��iscal Benefits �
�Increased Area Employment
�Construction Employmenti '
�Wa�es and Benefits '
C�Redirection of Vehicle Trips ,
l�City Objectiv�s (identified in DEIR)
❑Other Benefits identified by the Planning Commission or
Public
3
11j22J2013
T�r�i h��'� ��ti� o � n It�
Conduct a public hearing
�Take public comment and provide Planning Commission
comments
�Identify potential benefits of the Project and provide
direction on the statement of overridin� considerations
�Make a recommendation to the City Council on the rezoning
to Retail Commercial
4
I ,�`C i �� � � w `t�` rT� +i� �� v�, �'f � �t' {{cr���" � . .� - . . _ i . +. . _ y . , F '
�- � f• �� i /Aty � �� � ^ � �.� �:t',. ' �(' �i�� ''.i a�.'' 1. , +� - ` ' , .� r ^ .s � . � _ .� IV . . . '^1�, <
*� �� �.� e . • 1���wi• •6 m-. .�j�fn � " I �. +: •�,��,�:( '�`� F .
� " � I'L�+� . e� ; . t.� . - � , . . �j�.::.?� � _ ai,.� j ' �+.� . _ . ♦ � v � �.' C v ►` ' - • •
�' . v • i�i���! A , y� •Ar "'' j • ;}y: Y � � • ,..' „y-• a, .., . y . ! � _ • . . .... ' 7 . �x`+ "►:''�". '� "' !. w � .^� .
N:i! � � ' ' �4 r'� rs � � ��p: ,w . . . � �+�,�"� �� y��i. � :1 • • v . . \� . , w s . t . _
j�r":t �'1� 11 � • . � w�;� S e. �. ' 4 . • t + 's r� � . { �, ' ` `�� �� � '� � ' ' I.+ y4� ' � : �'�' , ' s . , . . _ � � � : 4 •. � jV� i .•� ..�, : :» . � . . . .
�� _ J .�a,.,� . �. .:..:��:� , . , . . : __._. �. _ . _ . . . . . . � . . M . - k � :
� .+ r A. •�. . „ � [�� s� � i � .
'r '' F`4 �... • • � ' /�ss . �. v � � ' y ^b
' ,�._ �'s ` ^,�,� � ��' � .r� ��� �:iY �� , �� � �„��.'" ,�,����i��' , ' ,�� �� �• .. •M ip• . �, •. • •-.•� � .y, ��'+ ° �`xy. �. � , � w
� � � • � > , w � .r. • " � � �; ' �F�-�'
, ! ��Jr , ... . � :. . �,� .� y ; r� . i�a 'ti:�. . , �y �a� �, ;�+.r . -a` ,;y � i�i: � �.arr. ,• . � • " . • . ' . � :C';��j +`- ^c4 •
,�, _ -�� ',�y •y��� .�,�,,,. � .��, ...�r �f, -� ( ��`�+.� :� � ��`�s� • ��.y.. _ _- s, (
;:�.�.,..,� , . , • � � � ,�' ' � e , .�. .. t �,".� �µ
�{:;��� � �: P v • t 7�;�.,'� ' . f � . . . . �� , • .... � ' . . � , t
�M. _ i� M1� �•fi W � • o- • • ` ` +'�•'• , ` �•� ^II
�..'i �'�� �� Tn ��/'�'�\� � p � � � �� .Y
p �d't +� ' . . �'�l,�� ��t� ,.. ,j"'1[y-' •q. . k � T � �r ._.�� •;
�• � ' ' �! 1 �"� �'��� �� MC;'' , � ..� �:� :�"����i ' _ t�"�3 ��� ��j��. 'r.i;; �•'� ��' '... ' +10��-.� � ti_�f �urJ� � � • . .� . � a ; a� i' � � � ' "'�+�.r+Y��
' t •�� } .� � � a .� �'��,>y� . � �� _ � "� � -� - � . (. � ;. � ti> . . . �, � ��+ _ , �.� � _ �.-� .�, ; - . .
f.�`.A � � Y■ • . r ' i ♦ . .( � ' STF � ��� ' '�• = 1 • ' i ' • � ' I } t ,���k•j „�,: •� � - � � i�' � �' �riit � � . ' � ti• �y ���f�� tl•• ��I � + .
"'� F . / ' '� ' _ � � � � :.�. t'-` . .�f . � , ,i�F t r.. .?�s, . : + .a •� .Y • - � ? .. , :. � � .
� ���. , . .' , .� � t n :'�.�� �1 . � .. ,w j �A r , . � � ..i.-. . �6 � .�• � � i`.l_� 1�� 5. �11 .L1`�' `� �7 � .
;i;. �1 :�: � ; . �N' R� � � � � : � ; 4 '^`�.t„T,y�a'w-�..,���. Z . aC�yMw.g:`..�, /f� '� � ' � ` !!�� � �� * � � �.` ^w. ••_a � �i�j '��iz'f"'j
• � � rit- � I ' . I ��r '�� �) t �� . �, •� � r � . . �P` 4.� ��I . ri �.�'_ : � �3: ' ..w;f' ' � `Z ��.4-.+ ' � . ♦ - . 1 i„� . . .
� � ��� / . ` ' �� (� /.�1 '�� ` � � • �fF-. :Z J= w ' �`��:y�� ,� �.J `V ' ����I�V :� '�� i . . • � �� � . "7 � � \ . . Ma
I- ^�rc� � ����• i-
� ' . . � �� ' � ' , ' • �J a � A. t�• �y ,�. �l :' ' � l• ' .��iad. a', . '^^w � � 1'/ o�aw� �1 .�J �i ffi � = ,`` �' �a.. 1••• J ' '°� . . � . .R�A
;; � .. .�. •A � � :i� , v=• `ai • � .. � . �. ..; ••. ..,... � • �'.,..,f:• ,1► ;t'•• � r) ' • � ' ' i
yJ� i • • . � _ � � � ,��� . )/(�,� �1 _ �. � �1 •` n�..� A �: . �;C��1! t ' �+:,�. ,f ' � ��� 1�� � x� y: . . 1 ''� ' � : r'. � � ' � � � , � �'� ' � � • ' �(/
`�1: �'� � . �� � s iJ �-�� AI _ '�'�. � - �$�. .. �' {�� r :��� •� 4C T M �` ��.. 1 �r. '� � `w.'.� i: {j� �.i' � �",v ! � � ,y ' y �i� , �,+• '• \t .
� � �.T:r� .�J. �� � � ,{ f�' r �Y ,y' � � � r �� • Y •4� � .�� � � . J�; � "y���p� �''^ .>, . . .�M•�`�.,,,,ti ' ' � � i�,l.� �, F�.�JY1 � 1 .. � � . � '� � C ^� 4 � ' � _ ... � �. , ,� � •
. �_ J ' � .t� . . .L L � � . • � g � � ` '• • .� ` ✓ .lt� ► �_YY � . 7 r _ . . .A e g ` J 'M . � � ��"• ,. •+�I.
� �1�' _ 1 ' �y :^ f,:P �� �•S •�! � J .�s[ •'� . � : ..' yyy�� '�� . d' ' �"`.i.�.� . •"� �3r' • . .` ,� a'1� I � ,"�, • `, -�`
� T� . • ♦ ., , ;� - t,� '4 � 5� • � .EJ�a_r� '�� L . r l '� �� w :.�..._. . . . � � •�. '_ . , t ,
K; ' .��h '• � .. TF "d . .'t.� p • t �° - ]^ � /R� : • . e J. - . '^'- - . � • �S` ��e� !"9 � ' . v .
-� � y1�e , �`:• . I � t �t { ;� i
.L�L . 4�eT Y � � • '.• �, �! {4 ' . r .J� . 'A • � ' �,: ' '�I � ..� . • s • �;"�? . ; . ".,.�� •u��=x�. ' A ! . ~. � '.� . - .�
;:r:: v ° a+ , � 1'� "e' � �"� . ' � ..,r,,,um, .. ,� � '1 �`. � .. .
d' � ..... • Y .3�v..: •;, :r Y - �`S' 0 1-, ' � �• , ", i'"'• ^ • * + ���r . T.ii�+ ,'p� _^ ' �a.. �ti�w7 ..,{{�• ^ � , � �'�e.�"'e,s'`'t'=•°--z-�a.. i � '� " ��::I�s l, ` � � , � .
. '3''. ' a .' y � � � � • � � . . �^ �.irl ' ar.:.:;.,,-- �-- 'i
�;:+' �= • .�• �• � . �,: . r3 N � � ; .��.s' • �'. .<- , . --:ti,... , yX�'�:!; � , . . �. �Y.''''_ "� '� • '�Nc..
. � ,�',' . • 1� f '1' '��, _ '�"'•�- ._ ' '�..�
.f �� }j��,^i•� � . ���� ... � �.fi• i .a . �f' . ' r :• ���``{�tt . . . . . "_ "_ .� kF +.`. � r7^ %. ` i ' . � ` ��.�'• � . . .. S �V �'� � ..•�"` `�=�...-�:s �- •`�.
�}R 'i� ' ' ' • �..� � . . • �y • . ���� . . • �': 7'b r � � . . . '
.[n _ ,�� r � y.� � .�. '� • n � :,�" ' p :. � • ,;;yt ' wi
�:.. 1 4 ��µ �' .. " ; • ';�,..��r.. .±I y1.�'.7 �R�Y�� ^ .. �'� J:�wT^' S. . . . .• • . �, . ' ' •' ' .' ' • �� , :� .
� J� �� �.
.C..� i � ,�q . . . (�LtrN � . . n• . •i �+� ��� �' ! . *`�ar'��i. �T� � . �KG � � • • '•�• �
r�' t g � i�� .t�`s' �•F�� Y A'�. . +� 5�'��� .�,�� • � '�� � . . . i L .• ~ .. � . . , � , „ �• /
� .� • �. ?�f,.� :\ . _ . .c z • y�� '.1� ° ♦•'v_•_° _ . -_ ;i . i�"�� . �t•d:�'i: ,�" ...T„_ /1';yf ,' ,.4.I.� . �.? .J4 . r. M� • � . . . ' �: •~�� I _ � .
' Y 11 ' v. ' • ., � �i ' ';�;C:, '!` . . . • /_•� , R- i ,r..
� i4, 4y a• ,• �e'11�f?.. �.����..'.. _ . . . :�� �. ._ . � . s . W!-M� .F.tinp;`�s,}..� E• ..� :' +a' R �r �.� r., . . . . . .� ,�,� ' ' . . ( • �� .f• � � ' � v �y
"d � ,- �!'�, ' +i;;��t :� *y . p u � , � . _�': r`• ��•.i : eF� .c•,C :�:, ,� .�.a. ,i.? Q, � ,� ♦ � ' �-�f'�.�`.��.,T: ,.. _ _ r :�• ��,�' , '1[ . . i.. ` . . ?, : t. y �y k ! .�.R
,.•� � � � - _ .r . ^ �'�r.-.,�� .�`=G4.�����• ,i:��,r,� . .•�.'a' e�'4� ,.f ,' • . , . �+�� . � Ir a����,�+
I•s'• Ut i� �' :�' i�F:: •Y "•v �; .e�a 4� �-a . � Y ? : ' r g� ' ' • �nY . . � • . - • � ' � (j � Y
&R ,`� . i 1��' � 'f . ! . � ,��`�' ' • �'..at.: . :.�r' ^' ' f'Y' . . • �I ' / •
� � ' . �. A�j 4Mi 1�..`���` nTkl�r � �TCl�. • ly'='a. :L'�i.. . � � . . . . �. . . . � � � �t� l�
�y}e ':.., . �. � � �I � � ...i. . . ••r , s .r . .+ . _ ��y, � w , � • . , .
ti�„�: `A �if:.y�. . t . �.� � "�: •
-f-�' � t � � '�� •. � .�sF� .� 'S� ii':�' . . t� •��l+'��i � - -t�s�a+�i�:.. l•" �� � �"�.py� �' r., u.�T��t�_�� ' qta 7.... ...:5�, �y. � _ ii i. . .. . _ j .�� 3 .��6 �� �� �.
/ SA(ft � f., ` � � � �� .
.. � " ,�L: ' fa '� ' . C� : r . _ ' �. . • ' - •r ' • . . ^�'.� • °i �. . �.;+` a h f^ � C' . ' , _ . t �.
" A ' ' . ^ '�, s . xyv- . a.a - • '��'�: ' r�. yy:, :<:1 . �. � .
��, ~."1 � d Y � v w �. . ' Ori • . � f , �: TjTYi.w � t' �♦ • . � �Y. � J . . la. i ja� . .
� •' SI• y7 :� .�/i ':�• . ��'.�y . . . �{�} .,� � ... , .. .. . ...� , - • r. • r . - ,�'t-'i'� _. - _y,.'. +x. w».. . . . . . . . . -PST,�`itt°.�1 �, '� �• . �. � ..:+ i1.'Y:.:;:.... "[w,. .K :jG , '•yY . . T �r'�.`�R/ �� f
• �}� . .+ •.R � xP" j� ��.•W y�h'- � . .' _j -�lIZh+S 7LL�:',-�T��_'+�c•'� :'ss" ''•'6 �w�, � .. � .-..IYf4l�raC:..i'} .ti.i�f� . • , ' Z'�. . •: _ ,F . . , . . ...R. ?R! �, :q.
� � ��j'� ' � 1.. f. . �'• '7:Q .` . w ; 'i .�i't•:.t . .. J ,} ..'i�vY�- '. �}t{,,,yy' ��n( �Jn t.' ..,y� � ._ _ v . .- •� . ; +t... . �: . . . ' � � . . . . . . ,�� ' . ' . � � �' �
�• ��'Y,�. . .PPr}. - L. � Y . . ` . f.+ 4��n +„y y � •� � j �1 . 7 � '� !
e � i �..��� �i ��,�: i��:� � R �� ' .- .rJ: ; �� : 'h4j�" .. _ •f,` , ' ��•P�'�iy/y.,t7�! :', ' • p N - ' 4 •it' '-.MYI_. ' . • ryG :. � � Y ' ` '3. v �J
$Y - � •• J�d'L v• •� ' w ... _ . ..-' . ,� 8.i�,"��lyy,� . a . :"�' .: , , ���g'�ew--.:�•:ec- . . .�� c. � . �. `•� '' • ': • �f*. a . , � �
s. v � ' _ �j.r. ;.+c, � : �; � � `�' •'. .,;.. A.,", h
• �M •• �.,s...y� � • '{�• ��y � ' • � � . .,�'` . � . �•i ' � 't ��+ �I � . . . . . . . , �w. ' "�l,. _ yM1��i���• . . 7:..
, .� ,�j.�. �,,� �, • T •.,� �� �,_:�� . .��:., s--� . ..;.�;.. �._.. . ___ .� __+ ,��� y . �{�y � � -- . : . . . _ • - - .�• /`: ���F-� .-- T. � . . • . •L"• � _
. �. �.>
y� e 4. a�� �� �K: "���� • •� <.��'f�!-rw �' . � ��iv�`'i.d^L"" � � 'Ttin'Yflc•" �'✓�.' � . •x�- - _ _ " J' .- _ lj.?. �� µ,i : . . �� ' . � � t �
. „�'t, . , ' , • .. ' ' •,.�, :dr�-• �;. ' � It � r
i <e . . .t-_ a.�,,.. ��as¢ :::vlYi;•. -. ?w:'ti.��' "V'� �?,i� w'r;. . �' . i � " '�5.' ^ �• � j.�-.' , ((�� : `
*;. �{ ' ' '�' • � .�- �r3�`�""� ��:'�• . . .- � yR... q��' . �'� .'�:��"' i'�.v� � 1.} ' � �.u. . � I �e _ � � " . • t • , J:r 1 . . 4 �r� ' �~� � y.,� �,r �
� ss r .�1. �^..- .. +R..N..�d:�� l �F �°}� . �t e� 'dL '^ .�+1.. ' �w: ,�� � � . �p
. af.' l � ,W �i. .i! y y..ryn ' f . "_ .. "�u' '�ia . �► �. 1 1 " -+'_ ' +f� �; � . s. �P: ' � � • •
, ;,�; � : � � • : _ "�,,�2� .5�. _-���6' ni•.:••-' " .. . �; ;:: . . .. . . �" . � y . �-�- -.l.�-,--•w. .. _<-. 'i` . � �� ���TT �,'r,, �a 4 �'� � �l .
�� - �� r r , � ��~ ��?,' .6�'s+ r. .r ' :+� � } � f ,.I�a!� ' " '�''�S�L`'..lo� � a'��,Nz'!�' '.(_ i�i;� � � � ( •'� ' ' i
v: ` . . d. ' . . '�r" � �' ,
� ����P� �:u� :v G.. � ' � !(.. ��a'� � . , �� .�Yy�' . 7 4 � �. � �•�v.. rty .:
w /M�� • . . � .� � . :. �• � a.. & ' t"
� '•' ' I ' {.''a' � �f �°4;�.
� w +�6�`.'��. ' --� • � °� . •'i s' . 'x:u !. ti�i ::1' • i l�u�,�y�n}�E�..i",• ' �� jJri�!�l• • - .� �s • � � � f
�. �� �r 'A. •.u: �. � r .: ��ti �`' '1+. �+�� �• ' �•
; . I � ,ii . .
� . _
. •
•
..� z� ? t a � �• .
',•'`k,+ � i�' �� � •. 1 'L°'�"r� • , ..'�. �' ' �' ' �`i"'•�� :�,:����r. rr ..:�i:• .!P -+ N • r� r ':ti/+ �'t-' ti !� � .�it!Y l. ..
i `_�.��"_' � g �3 .. �. , �;G e, J�ey fy�. .`y 1°n' �` � �i�r`+il• q. . ar.a• ?y" ��'I : :�`''�_ �: �� i d
�- tk1�. Y 'ti 1 P : '1 � r ' : uy � _�4 ��:� '.ii��+��'=y��j'�k� �} ii' .�i�tr � . � QU. ��"�M. i+�.- ..d � ' r •� 'r i •
�- _� •,. � .; ; '� 4� +�. � . �:•� r• 4 �� ak'.. .-� tAt. � �-,:e�. +�•, . �.+ar. S
. _ _
r -� . •
. . . _ ...,
. . .... .
�:��'., �•� -•• � .. • 'i. r. � :. : , ., ,, � - ,_• • Y � � .0 CY � �4� � �p; � ,. . .:'�:',�:. . .�.. ,y.. •,;, .�:,�� ;�� w• .. � `�•, ; ^ �
.
� �.. 4
. �
f ' ' �
. 0 p
�
� ' /�
(� ` � rnQ
.r , � _ y � . i�• :
• .
eti'S� '� ��� . � ' . r, .ti�� �l p
. . . • . ..- ' . .. . ' t� . ' .9jy _
:y o '
' � b..'�� l'l��l.n • . � � P,'� �1.'M •'�^� t . � •� .4 � �• q� � • �� � � }
� e�. .i • :: .Y'- �� ..� • �. � � .�. . �'A �.J . �.. ; . 5.: l..� �. •:.l' •le,:Nk w f fyf
} ' t "� � �!� 4 �y5 �:.1 . � + � �. �. 'y ` � n '
�� �' S . �fif• �: ; F. � 4e ..' �'.. , �.... un,. �.. ' . �.:r �n��'��ri:� '�i�yt' �a �� j ^ Jl i :7 L
' tll' ' �` � -lYJ� ��..�� :'• .�f� Y�� :) � 1 � �• �' ;�+�SrSI,'. a� I:��'�"'� .F' Y1 � . �" 1:' t ,$ i-di�x'v T"' � �" 'V"_ ' 13�1. � ! . '�,:
: ��! (.� t !�
�'iis .�+�"' - i 'a 'j: .. . _ ���.�:H�e A,Q n ���ir �Y�� z��+, ,�'r"`+'Z..�'L...r.`_ xp.^•' .1u.i�`L� i� � F - �. ��� r..r'. �' ,1.R_ ��jj��..J....l `_a.Z
�_ •. •N� a•i.. r . s w. .
.+^'�! .. : '� '- .:� - � . :� n' � Nl,.� �u�yr.� r � . • . . .
, �.'r-=�'"'-� � \ , � d bound +o 1Q`�Q Q � � :�_ � - � �° ~'`�'
'.� •. � ' ., r .r_--+�"' ..+^�1�� .l.. x o �{ r * � ■ ■ G�W 1 � ` VI V r V.� itT�''�i} ��.°f� ��+.. �� �"'�� , �' w.� �t'!7f�r.�.it7tr ` „ ��� r ' _.EYt�l����
� .�,�-�.��-,-�+- � ' �(• • � lij!.�� �.. �,,,,�� -�-�+.`= y i a: � �
Y a ..�y� r'__�__�� ' •"�•+ • �: � T� . � C1{/� tu.•�r�u��:5 '^�..� ...r�.�^�.._ � ��� �., � • ..• .. .. . �..
.di4. .�. �\ _i�.�'��� �,�,,�,�..�--� '�''�� � .- .. . � Li r.... �' . 5l�'. " �i" /� �.R • .
` � ; � � � .
�� ... �.. ..f�1,��'^w...'��r� . ti� . � ..
1�}.. •., � `'\^' ..,�...'�...�� �r��„`�,.,����� � � � i � .'�•'� i�t`u �^.�,�,�� { . M± ,.�` " � �...�CY�'T ' ' �{i!'�F. � �! ' . : � �
r; • � '�'^�-..... ` ' •� ���,�,. �•` • •F . . � � • �bM
,r i tiE=� +. L
R'�, •° .�.'``\ �` a +��':-=''S + 4� ' ''' .. ''L+.V:!�ir.�t���'1 '�''� +.^'��`�. , .��'� � f '�.'•-PJ,i.,�4.{ �J�FS'r ,t ,. .: ��'"'. �`�. +a.,rv �. • -
.�. ' :��y � � ai�,i'� • t • '^� ^., ` .... � . di�,�l�y� � ., � f] � ��.��_����..'�"�� ,: .r .�� _ .4
�� �- i G • � �� ���"''�+�.���/��'q.1yS'�'� a: _ .�,��:::.�•ll�+jn�;'�a�' I�. . � �J���.'� . t " �`,�',^: �yt � .. ', _ .1,�. �M�"_�..^�.r� C� � : Y .
..� •.. Q� J�� �
- � ,. .v<,��, : a '�' . r.� 8- a � , • - �:.-: s� � - �,,� ",zz•. j5 • }7^F :��: � Y .� : '^�:�+ ' A`.�.q:'~?�,���. t�„i ,
' , \ : .. V`.S ::J..-'� � �� • , t o ' .'r n. ,� ' � �S:k'�i. . X �.'"' •�i�'1 • '-.�...;.�-.'� �:4`��",�, '�Y`' 'i� +�. � � '� ��� � �.���,...:�"^'��.�..�'S', �.:�: ��
'. � `,1: . . . - _ .�:�.... � '� ' r . ! '. ' O � ...�r ._.L. ' ' ti `�.� w. 4�_ r ) �•� •s ::.� '� : �; L.� `�L.. �.. � •
. .. r (�. .�`. `A� ' �Y�-�,' yl .K . . �++.__ _ .5.� ' "�'ti `=� �f-{.. w• G''a ,.p: t. . 'f�'n �.3,.� � ' Txw�'r^ ;,+�"+���..i^",-� 4 �
�` - �t�. N � -�" � --�v �._. �; � , � .. . :;. ,,
,' ..� D � ' ��.,��': • •( -+.�""4�+���.r��� �.� �"-� ��.��' J��', :-�•k:f. � �' ..^./ •�y-�y"};�'3..`.:'L.�'� �':�'� � .
�.� �� 1 � '1 C '•1 :. w.i ' �l( � . � r�h� •_'�.. O� •• � �� . ^`�"+��+w,ti�_�...�`��•� T„'..�.�.'�� j"�+ �IV, �•.�I . ¢ � .C�`��`±.�. . �,.:��:v'i`�, , ` �'.� �* �
� ...�-- ' : ^ _A. ut �. • �� � •f,. �. z`. . � 1 � .� '�.' . �� : � � '
�. � P- rr ... . •s, � � _ �- �,�, � , �+� � . .- -�:- .,=:: ��-- y
- . ��_
- - -� . . � ••Y• ' µ . .. ' �. • ��� C- �- C.L: ���►.�.�y'��°�-.�.�" �. �G;,�."•�ti'w':ti'M� ��. '1� ' < y .. :�' ���i' �'.l. • ���w_^• '.0 � _ - _ . . .
.. �; ';y:. ... R :. . ----__ �..._. ----._ � � . Y -.� --�_
. � _ ,:� .-:�` A-A� .�..�.._: ... i a c. ;. .:; _ ----� :_ --�. ) � �,�. _ . +�'�'Y�' . . �` . , � � .
,��/�� • • �A 1� . +�.��.,��������.�. � � 4 � ��,^�.�� �
. f_��"_ ""_' ;.' _ ` � ♦ ...an . rti. • 'c.�.. "�.��-s'��.1-��' ,L„•,..��?�i.� `"�Z �,"��`i .� 7`i ' ( -',:��se: � . .',.�_°z` � . � �� ' r -
"i o • • ���...�'"'i " � ' , , •\��� �^1w�ti �� ~��. `".:'• '= �1� .. � .�`.=���+",�w. �+^� , .q � .':�nC;i � � '14 A• - +r`. � �� � L �)
� �_�� . ` S \,�' wi�i • YM^: N �Vt���� ��i�w�1- � • . �`.r r�....: � r�� �1� �. ' � '� '�1. ��fy} ` \i` /� �.4�i v • '..�.• � �
� � ,�� � . � , � � � M • �a. �. .�1�.�� .�'�w ��.����Y� � � � 1 ��'�:��yy.�.'4V ' � 1� I` � ��•�1
•J•� � .� � «. ,'r. • • r�n ��r�_� �� r �) 1!��� � �L fr
r�� t�• , rr:.. ,� �:,�±:�� #• a�. +:...
,. :� �:�„'' . ,�,.,���. . . �. 11 • ��q , •�i.�. ~ .� w � N. -.�,,.,, . •.:'��'y "%� --�:•����wv�',-,• `�?:" `' ^ �+ti �•���• �E '!''�'�' ��`��� . '`. .� 1
1 �..�!�r�. � w � ♦ \1�'NZN • ♦ � \ 4 . ' �i • V�. f ..w �• 1J,�.��M1y �.�_ `�L �`�:�� � �� "�• 'w� `� �.`r . '�;1•. �I �ri �i
� ��1 � . .. , .�� ��• !� � ♦ :,,t. .• � �� �� 1�:' . h�(� ' � -y�"• � `���� �• ► �
Z: • � • • • � • - shY ��:�'�• �. M . �� p'Mr�. �j. .::�R=�:C Hy. ��• " ��7�a.�:` 2..�'^� .�7!!�'. � . _ � �' �J
h • ; w • �.. ' + • �.(j�� MN_ ��� •\N F'.. ' � �`'w�ifr� � �•''� .L•.. .. -•. ti."�C' t: _.L`� �3 : �:. � � • .�;� .. � •,` �I . ���������0.1
' t :N' • �_ � � f iv r'+t:. �- 1�
» � �p � �NM N • • ,7 .'a^_���:57. .,'�'.�. • �_�•^�r '�`�'�..� �. *.•.. .. �F.S� .- .A :��:•?.L ^ �w�... . P
♦� �Y` `.�' • ' 2 • � �� ♦ � . . ` � i Ni t • . . •' �• -�7:_-�'..ti. �� . �.! i ' 0 S°�� �.'� V«: � .� A . ��
i:�� 4� i
7 . 'r'+ ' ,�� •h'`..'^��.... � : . _ '�'*'= h• �'�r�, . ��,•`•. '�. `/�' � . ' «_..: • . . ::� + y� ', 1 }11� .
� ' �!� 'i � ♦ • ; � :�� ;M,tiN MWN\NN, • ♦ � , � • i ��F � , �,•� h�� • �� V�9 a . . �.�.��•- �T+-�1+:;:• • / C��" " �y�.�' `
. �.. .t. .. �.�... � -�.., �. ac: A roxim ' � � �- -=•_ . ::�. ..
y „ . r , �... ..�.., .�.�;,. .:�,� , . �: �.,. ;; , pp te vemal wetland area at prese 1 �* .- -.�===- .=-- �> � ��
� :t � • �• ~-, �y 'y'�''• ��� N N~' M � � �dt, ' -'�.._' =� .. " �+"'-.�:.:"� .��.:^`�.] ��r.•� � nt (199i. : _ � `': . • '
�.:� �i , r�} • °M��.�_ N.�� • i�� -�' ':•, '~ �1^-' ":l'� r -, ' • "::`'• . . �:,� ..�-. = _.r�ti.,, as„� ..,�„ / '"1,� •9 .�...+..w: ��' . 1 ' .�: , � �/ � � ��
� �` � R �� N +�� • N . �'•"rv � - - +.. �=. �... �"„�..r,:. �-..���r�..'�-- .. �. • I: � iP * � �
,. . . • _��1•" �i '• `� "v4,�M Nr �„ �M���«�� '� r ':� �lr-7.a � M• ~ � +' ° . 'RG�,•.:r�:tx�-�..'`�'' � ��;``�:;�- �...� � , :,�-.�r.� -..�"'.-� + ! . Mt
. M y� ' vu. "Y �"�+y,��� "`�..,,,,, �'�-J7! ;i:�.:.',�T;-•_`��.. -.�. "ti. •L ♦ T +....,�'�+5:���.� �. j�
+� .91..• �M ♦ b N.� � • � � \ . . ' ^-...:_,�. ��„ .. .��.r �....._. . �:' ..� , 1 �f ! �
i;: . t � M- Y . �. �{� �� •'� NN��� ��e� 'r!'tM�'. ' 'T`!'• �� ��'' .. '.�f` •.., _ ��: ,�'�� � 'r"7..�; �....«.,�..'' .... 1 � -^1� ' " • �,
� f :.?:' i • ��. .�o�• �N �.`*N� � . yM '��� ..• �� � �� . �`�-�1 , � ti'"^�, y.,.,.:;,-;:.;;;:�'::?,;:5"',+' �,' ' '' '" ' �-+.."'�"�t,.7,•� i�, `�"+�^••---... �'�: . � ' :w� "1� • !-
�k,. ':` a . :°t . .... . � `N+.... �.. �•. •;.i:; aN� •_!A~ �� " . : �.""9"`r�- .. - . l'I �5:: .�-:tL�-:r='---•'-�-_.-�..; r•: �----".._.. `"--r a-.1�!•�'~ " �y.� 1�1 �"�I
' �i .LA' �+ • t , �'�.' ' ' i •Z • • h'�M��Nw!!�,� �N M.!� '�i� �� ,N� ' ~ta. .�• � :� � �a ♦.y � � �H �/I/ /� ` # �'�-• �..•� ^ ti.^� S ���y � -� ,ti ,I �� ���. � � • � � 1 t'�1 !� ' n� . � �'
a'; . �� • ~���~�h~~�� tij'� _ 'r . • C z. . �" • ' Y �1 _. a ^ ` ��,, � `\ ''�:t:i� r r
� Y y x• ..
'S � z� M��� h�N1� •�tiM '�. ' . _ti-� ,� .• •�«. � O 1 . £ � Q y��a��� _ i. J �', • i„ � � � '�. a
h�.: :h �. • � �.N � � � h�j �� • ..,- ;-t' '' 1- '.: -... . � . • •�S��h�i'i�' + . ' . V �� _.x;=-�"�a����' . � '+� I �; f . 1 • J -� � � r -4 �i�
. . • _3c•. �j• � :�.. �
r�f;;:, • ,• ,�� . ♦ ��M�•N�� ��► �� • w1. _ . . � i . ... ` �iQa, �N��������j! w►Y.�•�.Se ..` , `� � /1@g `,r --�+ �n 4�� ,�Y.. f . �i�' ` � w.
ia�.�,r'w>: ! t' I � M • i _� �N�jh� �. ,,���� �t ."'�� • � � �� N��� .�q � � �'1 ' - . , '�hr � e �� I: .'A�'� • ��
;� . " ' •.. » • ' NN �• '^•i � • �y 'w.i. ,R , ' � .q . • � •. . .�r.�a•.• y �s. "w.o ^- _ a.f. ��y. �+ t Sj,� ti .rt . � �. �" � • �
. }� , ' • �ii ti�N� •yN i q�� ♦i��: =• - �i� �W� �ii� � �N�i� �i � bti �h►�. . w -.. ' .. 0,`! � !�y�,. Y �. i ) � �!�E a .
r • j- .
�� K •. '
:.. . � . .. .. y� - =�+l� tE .... '�.ti-•:: , '�-4'.�, �.�� .... . - • .,�;� ;. -•�� �•'. � v. '' Jp
( %�a. • �� ��� _h• ��H� �� �• -� \�' • w .-+�� • w• N���• • �► M L,��� �! Q, . �5�..� .t ��41� : AP�.. (j/ t • e �
�� � ~ � � •n�� � �. � : . 'F'`S ' N�� �O� •�� ����.���N� � tis ti v . ', �1'a�y' ��'^�" -.�.,�,•� : . . • o" �'..
..:.. � • s#,.�r M�N . •h• •• �: •. y�,,,, • ► . . ' -. .�.. •• w �r=... , •���. N'w `"'aw .�. . .. s r��+ _,.. ��., , 1 , . , t •
:!' •. .���N�• � • �M �� • ��• ' �• . . . dtitM• •�� �� ��i��N r�� �� • • � •' • � ....� �1 � `':.� �.
`C�;S. ' � N�q • •�� }�• �N � NN�MM "�' .' ; �,\��.. � �,� N� •� .� �.. •�. y� '�.,� �, • y� . y . . :.::T.,,,,,,� �!.: � . . '�� �. � r� �, � si.'
�s�;_� �r►� NN ��• ~ .�i� y'�+ �• � t� ..�; r• • :`N �•_ •�.• �. � ��� :.�� .N�.�..' .._.. . . +.�s� . .. •i � ' '�c � .s � �r ,
' 1� � . N� _'����\� � � • � _ � • Y . � ti' •M• �_ � • � �� ����. • • �ti �� � . � ' .t.. • Y.., �� , • �. • ��
• •. • �• �� • • ' . � .
cv�:'�i ' •� ��:_ �w ����1 � • � .; . � . Z�• •�� ���i�� �'��N�_ _��` §yCin ��7'M��.`.
-�:.; . . . . ���• ���M� • �����M�� pN • v:• •���� h � • N � . M �~w� • 1� � . .
.' .��. �y • 4� �-S� ��L������� Hii� ' M �Nw�� • ��\� ��a� ' • • _• ' �• � :•��� N.� ~����.��~• � . �jr � . .. `
, `.v � ���� ~l���~� r� ����V � � " .�N������i�. ����M� � • • �•�� � � �� ��,y� a
�;s,.':: � � •� . • N • ♦q N .N � �� � .
kt:� ' " � � ��� �: �1 N � ���'M ����iill ��:hl' �M����y� N��Mi7�N����r�� � ` • . ••: . �..,'�. �-�..,,�'-~-�...�'� .:f. .;... , , � FIGURE9 •
..�.,• ��~h... �. *►a• N;«. ;+t%�..��• ii�,•... .��ti:�t: ' ���� `�•• •�-•
.'.�;4Z;: •�.. .• •• • ` ' •�f=N:a����.� �1��•«1�����~� • h •�iiiN11•••»»M.. •Z: • • � . � '; ': .� .
i(.:. . , . .. y •� , �� f„ • y�� �y ��. � ���•`� ��-� ~'] � � ��� • �_ �-^�'w � �1� u•�N� .
t1' ��'}�w.� t �•� 4���M�� • •� •�.. • ' �`�'♦ • N� I . . .
P ..fi= +. 'S N • _}�_•♦ ��� j � • M � .
^�ih ,�"e.',�a::ee � � J •'�R• r �•Y� . �h~~°��; N��k� ��y"�=� f�r� �i� � • � �� j �� ���i�j���� ti,._ y„ -'^ti �� N � ' ''�• .
.ai5%�'.� � A��w.�..r.`4.,�"..'�"y�.. . � � � �� :J� ij��}� ���0� ••'�=ii�^�� . ���r. � �"� "'�� � H �h� � 'Y. • !- � • .
sr' .: �.wt`""�...wP�;.. ^ • • •�M►�i1 •�•�}f H� • _,• • �n� �� ��F :�4 .
y: 4;.� t,`,�, !L°� �w�.�•�..,TL.:.: . ' � �': . �� •Y4 •�•���:• FZ ' '� N �� �` � �'1ry^,1,i;;�:��;F;�q^,���'��, y�i'.�� . ,�'� .
���,.. �y ��ti:: ':.�� �..'���r �L�y �� t. , d • ��H . p .a� •it� _��»,�' r i� • )� �!�� .�� �t��� ��'�i�^�:j }Z. ' .
� ' �e�s �.� .v�� _ CtiMw. ^�Lw.'...ry i.�y. 7r.�..4T„ ' �. ,��'\ v� �\`K' �1� \ � ` � ' 1\ � •\�\• •'. ^F.. �.l�,� - ��. 4 . � . ' 1
_2- �- PRESENT r
_ti;.�:'' ..�. `+v'-'T�A.:� wia �!.��� �d .^,�:s 'Y"";�': �Y.:�"'C:::::y,,•:;1 Y ;' .�� 1���. •\• ►�I\��� • .�} i �iiii� + A
c:�•'y'.;3 ..� js.�.�';j.�..Jk .��.: M• y� -: . _, ,:�. .�. . .:�=�: ���:;:- ::<��:,�-:.:����:.-:. �... .� � _ �. . � . • c:.. jj � ...�.. � � � � ,- ;, . � :��_ �. , �: .� .. . ND HISTORIC WETLA
,r.f ._ . . + � �:. , a �;�,:;'� .�� 'i . t.. �►ia� � ,�.�E ,•: . NDS
,`,:. -vY �?.. `, �dr}.�T1.� ' 1 �. 0 ( �y...;y��.��.� .:ti: :��.�►4�1;,•.1:�w„4�„r�, ... � � �: �� • �„ip •��.�� • P►� J� • • _
.,;•4^;::1^::� • - �� I� .. .. ,..�, �_� .; ;:. '�,,,,1�2„
�::�'•i:: V . 7, .� �YS . . . � � � . •w�„ti:"n1�:::~;e�;�•;,.www". °� �.:,�. H.:L'• •.:. qY •�H� . •
. f t � : �..'r::. ^1�Gw:',. 'ti....:' '73... �^.,+,..••...:•t:C�C:�• �f;�f • � Or. =•M�i. ' . r •i � 1� � A s . . .
.. ,::...�::;•:;:.;:, 1� . ' I
';1i'lc; ^ a" ' • . ....'e„ �a , . � �."�. . +..��.�°�:;;,»�,:+.�... +.. ."1.:'7::y.�,,; ��. • • _ ;+
t' ' ' r , . '^�•`•�.1-.."^,�^•�-.....�;.L•'� +::`�1.7i�$ "-�.t:••.:.w .w l'
°.2ii�ij'. • . .Y r '� � . , � �'ti..,`�.�\'�+~..,•`r.{ti��"72t 4. :+.. ^.y.`'*..r':' ".�.'^:J^1 • t �.' � � � • �- �� : . • . ..
"'�'t.�;;�. + ...t�., `+C"?�:....•, � r9
Y`:+e� .::• ! ... . � It"`"w y � [ ' w A
. aw•• d � :. � 7 . • � ' �7^i^�,�-...'ti.:;:=..,�„Y"�,+�'+•. ,�w'`�ti.','�`-wtJ'..,..�A,,,� � ti� 1�F��(j . .
jr.,�• 9� • „ $ . 5:�+... �",rY.Y....�.w.. '�..."'`..... y '�+x . . . � � Scale 1 �Y
� n e�e e r .�" : ' , 1 . n
ve �`:`.�`.."'�`.."....•:. "�`'�:�`"t�+...-.. .r. �tr:�: • �.�� O�+
. �..�.~ � • AM��! �Z1a f � \�..` tiry ��.'N'Y"`. 4i'+��'�`w�.y . • . • . b . , �
1l� �+rirb ��Nw � Q •: �•-_�'�ti:1.7`. ..,,.�.:,'.j•� `.... +..s-+'`.��.,�+,�ti. �W'� " � /'. d r�•
�nM�1�wM�� .�w� !ii �� �"i�' :_��.'ti�v '� "+l �..'.y'�.:�t,�::+..1�. r� . ;i M1'� _.Ir -R+r1 �' � ,.�i�° . � , \q ' ' �
4(�� . . . . :A' r Y ��• _ '-r5z'�aL:'�.r . � 'I.1ti.f�",c,��1.. �:r.. „*,"�. ,, �^.�,�t��:�`,�'. ,,,��'„y_ � ..� � - � •�S f�OY �EIIIAI �NOTOYR�MYOATED . ' ai0.•^rr. 1 ' . .
�u4i''�fi.: . � : :�•'�::: 1�^^+.5'•'t�:?vt.^�L: :2�1�.�?� t .+«Xtf . , �Y � �.:�.�:A� _:a.il�: ` i'H�J'f0 iNAi� i �1RYe % r�)e• � G"EA579i niyCALIF9�tNIA . � . ... J �
� r
. . . . . . ., _ . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . _ ....., . . .. . . . " .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 ITEM 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: December 11, 2013
4
5 TO: Planning Commission
6
7 FROM: Kim Jordan, Senior Planner
8
9 SUBJECT: Continuance of the Public Hearing for the Costco Warehouse and Fueling Station
10 Site Development Permit
11 Eastside, south end of Airport Park Boulevard
12 APNs 180-110-08, 09, 10 and 180-080-57, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, and 67
13 File Nos.: 11-01-REZ-SDP-CC-PC and 11-16-EIR-CC
14
15 REQUEST
16
17 Staff requests the Planning Commission continue the public hearing for the Costco Warehouse
18 and Fueling Station site development permit to a date certain of January 22, 2014.
19
20 BACKGROUND
21
22 At the November 21, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed
23 the Costco Wholesale Project environmental impact report (EIR) and voted to recommend the
24 City Council certify the EIR. At the meeting, the Planning Commission also considered the
25 statement of overriding considerations and the rezoning and voted to recommend the City
26 Council adopt a statement of overriding considerations and approve the rezoning required for
27 the Project.
28
29 On December 4, 2013, the City Council conducted a public hearing to consider the certification
30 of the Costco Wholesale Project EIR. Due to the additional comments submitted at the
31 meeting, the City Council decided not to vote on the certification of the EIR. Instead, the City
32 Council closed the public hearing and continued its consideration of the certification of the EIR
33 to its December 18, 2013 meeting in order to allow staff and the City's EIR consultants time to
34 review the comments submitted at the meeting and provide responses as necessary.
35
36 As required, the December 11, 2013 Planning Commission public hearing for the Costco
37 Warehouse and Fueling Station site development permit was publicly noticed. However, since
38 the City Council continued its consideration of the EIR, the Planning Commission cannot
39 consider the site development permit (consideration of the site development permit can only
40 occur after certification of the EIR). Therefore, staff requests that at the December 11t" meeting,
41 Planning Commission announce the item and continue it to a date certain of January 22, 2014.
42 The public hearing on the item cannot be conducted until the City Council has certified the EIR.
43
44 On December 6th, staff sent an email with notifying persons on the Costco interested parties
45 email list that the December 11th Planning Commission public hearing on the Costco
46 Warehouse and Fueling Station site development permit would need to be continued.
47
1