HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_05132015 Final 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 May 13, 2015
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair
7 Christopher Watt
8 Mark Hilliker
9 Laura Christensen
10
11 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
12 Charley Stump, Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
13 Kevin Thompson, Principal Planner
14 Michelle Johnson, Assistant Planner
15 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
16
17 1. CALL TO ORDER
18 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at
19 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
20
21 2. ROLL CALL
22
23 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
24
25 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes from the March 11, 2015 meeting are included for
26 review and approval.
27
28 Commissioner Watt made the following corrections to the March 11, 2015 minutes:
29
30 Page 2, line 52, sentence to read, `Are there samples available of the coating that would be used on the
31 mono-pole?'
32
33 Page 3, line 24, sentence to read, `Provided some coating samples to staff and noted the coating would
34 be a painted flat finish.'
35
36 M/S Christensen/Watt to approve March 11, 2015 minutes, as amended. Motion carried (4-0).
37
38 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
39 Chair Whetzel requested the Commission and those persons in attendance observe a moment of silence
40 in memory of Commissioner Judy Pruden.
41
42 6. APPEAL PROCESS — Chair Whetzel read the appeal process. For matters heard at this
43 meeting, the final date to appeal is May 25, 2015.
44
45 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission.
46
47 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE- Confirmed by staff.
48
49 9. PUBLIC HEARING
50 9A. Gilbert Mixed-Use Site Development Permit and Use Permit, 676 South Orchard Avenue
51 (File No. 37). Consideration and possible action of a request for approval of a Site Development
52 Permit and Use Permit to allow mixed use development (single family residence, small wool
53 procession mill, and operation of a food truck at 676 South Orchard Avenue, Ukiah.
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 1
1 Assistant Planner Johnson gave a staff report and a PowerPoint presentation related to a project
2 description concerning the three proposed uses on the site and staff's analysis of the project for
3 consistency with the goals/policies of the General Plan, and applicable zoning regulations as provided for
4 in the staff report for this agenda item and asked the Commission consider/discuss the following project
5 components:
6 • Hours of operation for wool mill use and food truck use
7 • On-site parking
8 • Landscaping
9 • Project compatibility with surrounding land uses
10 • Food truck project component and location
11 • Noise
12 • Maintenance
13 • Fa�ade appearance for the wool mill building
14 • Storage containers related to aesthetics and setback issues/location
15 • On-site traffic and pedestrian circulation
16
17 Noted: While the subject property is zoned C1, the City zoning ordinance requires a Determination of
18 Appropriate Use be made by the Planning Director for the wool mill use, since this particular use is not
19 specifically called out as an allowed or permitted use in the zoning code and referred to attachment 5 of
20 the staff report that provides the necessary the findings made to support a Determinate of Appropriate
21 Use.
22
23 Assistant Planner Johnson provided the Commission with public comments (9) regarding the project
24 that were received by staff after the packet was prepared incorporated for reference purposed in the
25 minutes as attachment 1.
26
27 Commissioner Hilliker:
28 • Questioned the location of the proposed handicap parking space.
29 • Has concern related to hours of operation for the wool mill use and potential noise impacts to the
30 residential neighbors located along the western property line.
31 • Noted the wool mill building has an address of 676 A but the address for the parcel is 676 South
32 Orchard Avenue.
33 • Received several telephone calls from persons residing in Sonoma County and surrounding
34 areas supporting the project and expressing the need for a wool mill in Mendocino County.
35
36 Commissioner Christensen:
37 • Asked about City code requirements for having storage containers on property as it relates to the
38 possible need for a use permit/building permit and compliance with setback standards. The shed
39 is moveable.
40 • How does City code address the element of a food truck and associated use? Is this considered a
41 temporary or permanent use?
42
43 Assistant Planner Johnson:
44 • The existing storage container in its present location does not comply with City setback
45 requirements and referred to the site plans in this regard.
46 • ApplicanYs project description in attachment 4 addresses the shipping containers:
47 ■ Two shipping containers are proposed for storage purposes (the existing 8 foot x 40 foot
48 container and a new 8 foot by 20 foot container)for placement in the northwest corner of the
49 property as mapped on the site plan. In choosing an appropriate location, careful
50 consideration was given to all potential impacts to the area, surrounding uses, aesthetic
51 quality of the area, trees that are located beneath and that the containers fulfill their intended
52 purpose. It is necessary to have cost effective on-site storage facilities to effectively
53 accommodate the operation of the wool mill.
54 ■ Applicant provides three options related to location of the storage containers as discussed on
55 pages 9 through 12 of attachment 4 where the preferred alternative is option 3.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 2
1 Chair Whetzel:
2 • It is likely the shipping container is an accessory structure, like a shed.
3
4 Principal Planner Thompson:
5 • An accessory building that is 120 sq. ft. or larger does not require a building permit.
6 • In this case, the container is larger than 120 sq. ft. and City setback requirements do apply.
7 • Related to the food truck use, staff is currently reviewing new standards in this regard. A food
8 truck operation does require approval of a use permit. Acknowledged the food truck use does
9 have some `gray areas' with regard to applicable standards that are being looked at, such as
10 parking in the public right-of-way or on private property and/or other associated `gray areas' that
11 need to be looked at.
12
13 Planning Director Stump:
14 • Planning/building staff will confirm the existing shed/storage container complies with all related
15 City standards and necessary permits.
16
17 Commissioner Watt:
18 • Understands it is difficult to determine potential noise impacts for the project if there is no
19 equipment in place so that a study can be conducted. Asked about how a judgment/determination
20 can be made about whether or not the wool mill operation exceeds the acceptable ambient noise
21 level allowed for the operation once the equipment is installed for noise compliance purposes?
22 • Requested clarification the way it is now relative to project conditions of approval is that the
23 element of noise impacts is essentially `complaint driven.'
24 • Related to deliveries and/or how the wool will be received on-site, asked about how this would
25 work in the lot in terms of circulation on the site.
26
27 Assistant Planner Johnson:
28 • A device (noise meter) is available that can measure/test noise levels. A condition of approval
29 can be added requiring the ambient noise level of the equipment be tested once the equipment is
30 installed. Staff requested noise data early on for the project analysis, but the information was not
31 available because the original equipment manufacturer was no longer in business such that the
32 technical documentation/information is not obtainable. As such for comparison purposes another
33 mill that has like equipment and operating circumstances reported that at 50 ft. from the
34 equipment through a 2 x 6 foot wall, the decibel level is similar to the ambient level so based on
35 this information, staff determined the project will not significantly alter the decibel level at any of
36 the property lines and referred to pages 9 and 10 of the staff report that addresses the issue of
37 noise and provides sound level data. Further assuring factors related to potential noise impacts is
38 that the bathroom for the wool mill is placed against the west wall between the residential
39 properties and the equipment and there is a wooden fence between the mill building and the
40 property line that allows for an additional sound barrier. Of assistance as a sound barrier would
41 be the actual wool itself stacked against the wall ready for the various processing cycles. To
42 complete an ambient noise level measurement the equipment for the proposed wool mill must be
43 present on the property. From a financial perspective, the applicant is not proposing to purchase
44 the equipment until after the project is approved. As such, the information submitted from the
45 applicant regarding noise levels is from another mill having the same or similar operation (See
46 page 9 of the staff report for this information/data).
47 • The applicant has indicated the noise generated by the mill will probably be comparable to that of
48 a machine shop with nearly all the noise from the machinery contained within the building. Noise
49 should rarely be perceptible anywhere beyond the property line. Based on information from
50 similar wool mill operations, the two loudest pieces of equipment will be the carder and pinrafter
51 that can be heard from 30 and 50 feet away.
52 • Again, a condition of approval can be added that more specifically addresses noise and
53 perspective complaints. Confirmed the matter of potential noise impacts at this point would be
54 complaint driven.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 3
1 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:27 p.m.
2
3 Matthew Gilbert, Applicant:
4 • Wool deliveries would be infrequent and more or less season-based. Wool for processing would
5 typically be dropped off by individuals using their cars or by truck via the US Postal Service or
6 UPS. The site has sufficient parking accommodations and adequate circulation so deliveries
7 either by vehicle or truck should not be a problem and referred to the site plans to demonstrate
8 how deliveries can be effectively be made.
9
10 Judy Baughus:
11 • Resides in the neighborhood.
12 • Is pleased and amazed how much the applicant has cleaned up and aesthetically improved the
13 site.
14 • Does not see that traffic would be an issue citing the Ukiah Unified School District administrative
15 offices and U S Post Office were allowed to operate on S. Orchard Street so comparatively
16 speaking the Wool Mill/Food Truck business is a small operation. It is likely most people
17 working/residing working in the area would walk to the Food Truck.
18 • Also does not see on-site parking/circulation to be a problem as the site has a very large
19 driveway.
20 • Supports approval of the wool mill project.
21
22 Debby Bradford:
23 • Shears her sheep twice a year so she would bring her wool by car to the mill for processing.
24 • There is a waiting list from three to eight or nine months if she was to send her wool elsewhere
25 for processing and this is not economically feasible.
26 • Would like to have a local wool mill and it is a necessity.
27 • Supports approval of the wool mill project.
28
29 Stephany Wilkes:
30 • Is a sheep shearer, knitter/spinner and now an investor in the applicanYs business plan.
31 • It is very expensive for wool to be sent for processing elsewhere. Finds that while the wool was
32 raised here, once it is sent away for processing, it does not return as a local product. Being able
33 to purchase yarn from wool processed locally is a huge endeavor/accomplishment.
34 • Supports project approval.
35
36 Nancy Finn:
37 • The wool mill project is a very valuable asset to the community and US industry in terms of job
38 generation and with the benefit of being able to produce/process at home particularly when so
39 much of US industry is being shipped overseas. It is important to keep as much industry on the
40 mainland as possible.
41 • Having a local wool mill is a much needed business and helps keep industry on the mainland.
42 • Approval of the project would keep/bring revenue in the City/County.
43 • Confirmed that wool mills in other states/counties are often backlogged and this is an issue for
44 persons in the wool industry residing/working in Mendocino/Lake/Sonoma and/or other
45 surrounding counties.
46 • Spent time today at the University of California's Hopland Research and Extension Center which
47 provides for an annual sheep shearing school that is the only such school in the State. This
48 teaching facility depends upon having sheep industry infrastructure in place in order to keep
49 going. Approval of the proposed wool mill is one of the ways we can support/keep such
50 infrastructure going.
51
52 Leslie H. Smyth:
53 • As a handicapped person, finds the driveway/parking lot adequate and very level.
54 • The proposed wool mill operation would provide local job opportunities for persons who might
55 otherwise have to leave Ukiah and may not want to work elsewhere.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 4
1 • Supports project approval.
2
3 John Harper, Livestock & Natural Resources adviser for the University of California's Cooperative
4 Extension for Mendocino and Lake Counties:
5 • Applicant has attended the sheep shearing school at the University. It was there the applicant
6 talked with him about his dream of being able to process the wool he sears for his customers right
7 here in Ukiah.
8 • The proposed project is a perfect fit for this county because it will provide jobs for this rural
9 economy.
10 • While nationwide the numbers of sheep are dwindling, Mendocino County has the opportunity to
11 boost its flock numbers by one or two percent in keeping with what Mendocino County once had
12 historically in the way of large flock numbers.
13 • Attributes much of the growth in numbers of sheep to the wine industry. Sheep used to roam
14 land that now are wine producing vineyards. Wineries are starting to use sheep in the vineyards
15 to cut back their cover cops and explained that while crops like clover help put nitrogen into the
16 soil for the grapes, eventually the growers need to mow or use herbicides to cut back the crops
17 when they compete too much with the vines. This is where sheep can help.
18 • Important to maintain the sheep industry infrastructure.
19 • A big reason for lost profits is that sheep producers in Mendocino and surrounding counties
20 usually have to ship their wool to the East Coast, Michigan or several hours away to be
21 washed/carded/and spun into wool.
22 • Having a wool mill owned and operated locally will not only help industry producers save money,
23 but the applicant would likely pay a higher price for their wool. Mendocino County has many
24 persons that are hand-spinners and weavers who like to work with local wool and yarn so there is
25 a whole host of yarn shops eager to feature locally-sourced yarn. Consumers today like to know
26 where their products come from.
27 • Supports project approval.
28
29 Christy Scollin:
30 • Finds the proposed new business to be one of the most`exciting' businesses to come to Ukiah.
31 • While the proposed business is small, it will create job opportunities and will help support
32 Mendocino County's agriculture industry. It will also bring business from Sonoma/Marin counties
33 and/or any place where sheep are raised but the wool cannot be processed.
34 • Supports project approval.
35
36 Peggy Agen:
37 • Resides in Potter Valley; Has been in the sheep business for over 30 years and noted finding an
38 appropriate place to process her wool has been a problem all these years.
39 • Applicant is knowledgeable about wool processing/shearing and his proposed business plan
40 would be advantageous to the community and for those working in the sheep industry.
41 • Supports project approval.
42
43 Deanne Thomas:
44 • Applicant is familiar with and highly trained in the sheep industry.
45 • Has been sending her wool to Morro Bay where this operation does not `spin' the wool. The
46 proposed local wool mill will actually go through all the wool/yarn making processes where the
47 wool will actually be spun into yarn.
48 • Would like to be able to have her wool processed locally and supports project approval.
49
50 Commissioner Watt:
51 • Requested clarification that when Public Works reviewed the project, the department did not have
52 concerns about the washing of the wool in terms of potential load on the City Water/Sewer
53 Treatment Plant.
54
55 Assistant Planner Johnson:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 5
1 • Public Works has indicated the matter of washing the wool will be addressed during the building
2 permit phase where a determination will be made whether or not the installation of a grease
3 interceptor is necessary.
4
5 Commissioner Hilliker:
6 • Sees there is definitely a demand to have a local wool mill and questioned what would occur if the
7 mill had to expand. Would another site have to be sought? It may be the applicant may have
8 under-estimated the overload/success his business may have.
9 • Recommends the City Public Works consider installing a pedestrian crosswalk for safety
10 purposes on S. Orchard Avenue in and around the vicinity of the Wool Mill that could serve
11 pedestrians going to the Food Truck from the Post Office, UUSD offices, medical offices and/or
12 other businesses operating on this street.
13
14 Chair Whetzel:
15 • What is the immediate capacity the business could initially handle? Would the applicant be able
16 to process wool timely or is a backlog anticipated?
17 • Asked about the applicant's preference related to the three fa�ade designs proposed.
18 • Notes street parking is available along S. Orchard Avenue. Related to the issue of granting relief
19 from the parking requirements it may be best if employees of the wool mill park on the street
20 rather than on the site which would allow for additional on-site parking.
21 • Related to parking for the Wool Mill use, persons would drop off the wool and likely leave once
22 this task is completed without having to tie up a parking space for a long period of time. In this
23 regard, the Wool Mill use is unique in terms of parking.
24 • Is of the opinion noise from the Wool Mill should not be an issue with the walls, fencing, and the
25 storing of wool against the back wall that would all act as a sound barrier and the general traffic
26 noise on S. Orchard Avenue with the Post Office that operates across the street such that all the
27 noise that accompanies this operation would likely block out any noise generated from the wool
28 mill.
29 • Supports noise impacts are `complaint driven' such that Planning staff would re-visit the use and
30 come up with a solution should noise become an issue.
31 • Asked about the start time of 5:00 a.m. for the wool mill operation. It may be that the applicant
32 should begin work later.
33
34 Commissioner Watt:
35 • Sees that the Commission has to make a decision about whether or not to approve the
36 applicant's request for a reduction in the required parking from 11 spaces required to 8 as
37 analyzed by staff on page 7 in the staff report.
38 • Will the Food Truck come to the site on a daily basis, leave or stay for some extended period of
39 time? Will the people that operate the Foot Truck drive to the site to work? Was consideration
40 given to the people working in the Food Truck with regard to parking?
41 • Requested clarification the parking analysis for the Food Truck takes into consideration the
42 employees driving to work and parking or does it assume the employees would show up in the
43 truck?
44 • Asked how noise complaints would be handled by staff.
45
46 Commissioner Christensen:
47 • Supports installation of a crosswalk at the Wool Mill location. Has observed people parking in
48 front of the Wool Mill and walking across the street to the Post Office.
49
50 Matthew Gilbert:
51 • Finds it too soon to think about future growth of the business. Would just like to get the business
52 started. Will address expansion of the business when it is time to do so.
53 • With the necessary equipment in place, business would be able to handle/process about 2,000
54 Ibs. of wool per month. It will take a while to reach this production goal because employees have
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 6
1 to be sufficiently trained in this regard. It may take as long as a couple of years to fully reach
2 production capability.
3 • Option 3 is his fa�ade design preference.
4
5 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:42 p.m.
6
7 Assistant Planner Johnson:
8 • Addressed parking on the site, applicant purposes eight parking spaces while 11 parking spaces
9 are required; One of these spaces is van accessible and a minimum of six bicycle parking spaces
10 will be provided. Two spaces will be available for the single-family dwelling, three spaces for the
11 food truck customers, and four spaces for the mill employees with five of the bicycle parking
12 spaces counted as one parking space. Related to the proposed modification to the parking
13 requirement, noted the project is essentially shy two parking spaces. The proposed bicycle
14 parking will make up for one of the three parking spaces of the required 11 spaces, but the
15 project is still shy two parking spaces.
16 • The applicant is anticipating that most of the traffic will be generated by the Food Truck operation.
17 Based upon the location of the Food Truck most of the traffic is likely to be foot traffic. Staff is of
18 the opinion the proposed eight parking spaces would be sufficient for the on-site uses due to the
19 uniqueness of the proposed uses and that parking would not be a problem. Referred to staff's
20 parking analysis as provided on page 7 of the staff report and noted the applicant is proposing to
21 provide two spaces for the outdoor sales of the three required, which should not be an issue
22 because again most of the Food Truck traffic would likely be foot traffic. Street frontage parking is
23 not being counted as part of the parking analysis for the project but rather just on-site parking.
24 • The Food Truck will come and go each day. It will come in the morning and leave in the evening.
25 This is where the potential for the different food trucks come into play. Confirmed the people who
26 work in the Food Truck drive to the site in the Food Truck. The employees will not be parking on
27 the site or the street and this is the reason staff did not allow for parking considerations for
28 employees of the Food Truck. Again, referred to Staff's parking analysis in the staff report for the
29 breakdown in the number of parking spaces required for the different uses on the site. Confirmed
30 parking for the Food Truck has been addressed noting the employees come in the truck and
31 would not require parking accommodations. The parking analysis was conducted on this premise.
32
33 Planning Director Stump:
34 • The Planning Commission has the discretion to determine how parking is to occur on the site.
35 • Staff's rationale as it relates to parking is that there is something unique about the proposed
36 mixed-use project that justifies relief from the City parking standards and supports that the
37 Commission follow this same conclusion in its finding to justify relief from the parking standards
38 in the conditions of approval.
39 • The City Building Official or Planning staff would address complaint issues. It is likely a noise
40 meter would be implemented where `spot readings' would be taken at different times of the day
41 to measure the decibel levels. If the use is found to violate the City's adopted noise ordinance,
42 staff would work with the applicant to reduce the noise to levels that comply with the ordinance.
43
44 There was Commission/staff discussion concerning acceptable decibels levels at different times of the
45 time as addressed in the `Sound Level A, Decibels' chart on page 9 of the staff report, noting that 65
46 decibels is an acceptable noise level for a commercial use from 7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.
47
48 Assistant Planner Johnson:
49 • Related to the start time for the wool mill during weekdays, the applicant expressed a desire to
50 have flexibility in this regard, particularly for times when there was a lot of work to do and
51 wanted the opportunity to start work at 5:00 a.m. and end at 10:00 p.m. On weekends, the
52 applicant purposes a start time of 9:00 a.m. and end at 5:00 p.m. The Food Truck hours would
53 be from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. based upon the season and/or when daylight ends because no
54 lighting is purposed for the project.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 7
1 • The City noise ordinance regulations prohibits any person to operate any machinery,
2 equipment, pump, fan air conditioning apparatus, or similar mechanical device in any manner
3 so as to create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line of any property
4 to exceed the ambient base noise level by more the five decibels between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
5 p.m. As noted above, the noise generated by the proposed use will like be comparable to a
6 machine shop.
7
8 Commissioner Hilliker:
9 • Has some concern about noise impacts to the residential area located immediate to the west of
10 the property line. Acknowledged there is a wooden fence between the mill building and the
11 property line providing for an additional sound barrier and the applicant has provided other
12 measures to reduce sound levels.
13 • Is of the opinion should a lot of noise complaints be generated and/or become an issue
14 regarding the wool mill operation, there needs to be a discussion about how to best mitigate the
15 noise impacts and/or request the start time be modified such that no machinery is used for the
16 first hour or hour and one-half of the early start time if this is possible where other work duties
17 can be conducted during this timeframe.
18 • At this point, we have to wait and see what happens.
19 • It would appear that at an acceptable level of 65 decibels for a commercial use operating from
20 7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. noise for the wool mill should not be a problem particularly with the
21 measures the applicant has taken/infrastructure in place to effectively mitigate noise and with
22 the noise generated from other uses in the surrounding neighborhood.
23
24 Chair Whetzel:
25 • Has no problem giving the applicant flexibility with regard to start time for the wool mill.
26 • It may be that in the beginning the applicant could begin work time at 6:00 a.m. rather than 5 a.m.
27 until it becomes apparent a 5:00 a.m. start time is necessary.
28
29 Commission consensus concerning Fa�ade Design:
30 • Disagreed with the DRB's recommendation in this regard; Also disagrees with the DRB that there
31 are other examples of the fa�ade design option 3 alternative in Ukiah.
32 • Preference is the fa�ade design option 3 alternative.
33
34 Commission consensus concerning parking:
35 • Is fine with allowing modification to the City parking standards for the project.
36
37 Commission consensus concerning the storage containers:
38 • The existing storage container must be relocated and is fine with the preferred location relative to
39 the option 3 alternative as specifically described on page 11 in attachment 4 of the staff report
40 and as addressed in staff's analysis of the staff report. This location would be under the mature
41 Oak tree located on the north side of the parcel as shown on the site plan in attachment 10 of the
42 staff report. The shipping containers must comply with City setback requirements.
43 • Likes the treatment the applicant used to aesthetically screen the existing shipping/storage
44 container as shown in attachment 9 of the staff report.
45 • There was Commission discussion concerning the dimensions for the two storage containers as
46 specifically addressed on page 9 of attachment 4 in the staff report. Fine with dimensions for the
47 two shipping containers.
48 • There was discussion about the location of the new storage container as shown on the site plans.
49 Fine with the location.
50
51 Commission consensus concerning signage:
52 • Fine with signage as proposed.
53
54 Assistant Planner Johnson:
55 • The applicant is required to apply for a sign permit as part of the approval process.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 8
1 There was further discussion concerning the potential noise impacts and whether or not a `complaint
2 driven' process is the best approach to take. With a complaint driven process would have to re-evaluate
3 the situation based on the number of complaints received.
4
5 Commission consensus regarding noise from the Wool Mill:
6
7 • Fine with `complaint driven process' and with allowing some flexibility with the start time for the
8 wool mill operation.
9
10 M/S Watt/Hilliker to approve Gilbert Mixed-Use Site Development Permit and Use Permit (File No. 37)
11 with Use Permit Findings in attachment 1, Site Development Findings in attachment 2, and Use Permit
12 and Site Development Permit Conditions of Approval in attachment 3. Motion carried (4-0).
13
14
15 FINAL GILBERT MIXED-USE USE PERMIT FINDINGS
16 676 SOUTH ORCHARD AVENUE/APN 002-320-53
17 MAY 13T" 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION
18 FILE NO: MUNIS 37
19
20 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
21 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
22
23 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
24 Plan as described in the staff report.
25 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in the
26 staff report.
27 3. The project approved with conditions is compatible with surrounding uses based on the
28 following:
29 a) The project site is located within an existing commercial area and is surrounded mainly
30 by commercial uses.
31 b) The proposed projects are less intensive than surrounding uses given the amount of
32 traffic generated will be less than the existing surrounding uses.
33 c) The food truck hours of operation would be consistent with other business in the area and
34 is consistent and the hours of operation for the wool mill will not increase customer traffic;
35 the majority of traffic would be from the 3-4 employees.
36
37 4. The project will not be detrimental to the public's health , safety and general welfare based on the
38 following:
39
40 a) Through the use permit the operational characteristics will be regulated, therefore the
41 project would not be detrimental to the surrounding uses.
42 b) The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official,
43 and Public Works and any review comments from these departments have been included
44 as conditions of approval.
45 c) The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
46 d) The project is consistent with the Airport Master Plan B2 compatibility zone requirements.
47 e) The proposed project will include a painted pedestrian pathway from the south, east
48 corner across the parking lot to the food truck for increased pedestrian safety and has
49 been added as Conditions of Approval 5h;
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 9
1 f) The proposed project will include directional arrows to distinguish the encourage vehicle
2 flow of traffic; and distinguish the parking lot from the outdoor dining area and has been
3 added as Conditions of Approval 5i;
4
5 5. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
6 Section 15301, Existing Facilities, which allows additions to existing building and installation of
7 replacement signage; Section 15303 Class 3(c), Conversion of existing small structures from one
8 use to anther provided the building does not exceed 10,000 square feet and Section 15311, and
9 Accessory Structures, which allows new signs based on the following:
10
11 a) The total building square footage is 21,365 square feet.
12 b) The Project includes mixed use development that would include a single family home,
13 Food Truck, and conversion of a garage to a Wool Mill.
14 c) The Project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable
15 general plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and
16 regulations based on the analysis in the staff report.
17 d) Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police
18 Department and Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities
19 and public services.
20 e) The Project is a development site comprised primarily impervious surfaces (parking lot
21 and building). The site and surrounding area are not environmentally sensitive. The
22 Project does not include the removal of any trees. There are no wetlands, creeks, or
23 water bodies on the site.
24 f) The Project includes two new 8 foot galvanized metal planters; there is existing
25 landscaping on the property and 13 mature trees.
26 g) The Project includes the installation of two (2) new signs on an existing 8 foot by 8 foot
27 free-standing sign structure.
28
29 6. Notice of the proposed project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
30 Ordinance:
31
32 A. posted in three places on the project site on April 30, 2015;
33 B. mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on April 30, 2015; and
34 C. published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on May 03, 2015.
35
36 FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS
37 GILBERT MIXED-USE
38 676 SOUTH ORCHARD AVENUE/APN 002-320-53
39 MAY 13T" 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION
40 FILE NO: MUNIS 37
41
42 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
43 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
44
45 6. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
46 Plan as described in the staff report.
47
48 7. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in the
49 staff report.
50
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 10
1 8. The proposed project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic
2 pattern based on the following:
3
4 a) The proposed project would upgrade the existing development on the site, and add a
5 pedestrian walkway from the food truck to the parking lot. The Project is required to
6 comply with current ADA accessibility requirements which would likely change the
7 location and configuration of existing accessible parking spaces and pathways. This
8 would improve the pedestrian traffic pattern for some people.
9
10 9. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic
11 on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or
12 surrounding uses.
13
14 a) The Project would not change the existing access and circulation to the site; staff is
15 recommending directional arrows to help with site circulation (see attachments 3; draft
16 conditions of approval 5i).
17
18 10. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the
19 proposed structure(s)from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and screening
20 large expanses of paved areas.
21
22 a) The project site is currently landscaped with lawn along the street frontage; includes 13
23 trees, shrubs, flowering bushes, and perennial planting. The applicant is proposing to two
24 new 8 feet long galvanized planters as a barrier between the food truck and the parking
25 lot. Therefore sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating
26 or screening the proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and
27 breaking up and screening large expanses of paved areas.
28 b) There are two mature liquid ambers along the street frontage that act as screen between
29 the street and house; and a mature oak on the south side of the proposed Wool Mill. As
30 proposed the landscaping is proportional to the building elevations.
31
32 11. The proposed development will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property, or on the
33 property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings in the
34 neighborhood, or impair the value thereof.
35
36 a) The project complies with the C1 height and setback requirements ensuring adequate
37 light and air and separation of uses. The project would not cut out light or air or hinder the
38 development or use of building in the neighborhood based on the following:
39
40 b) The project is appropriately designed as required by C1 zone development standards.
41 The project received preliminary review by the Design Review Board and requires formal
42 project approval by the Planning Commission. This process ensures a quality project that
43 would not impair the value to properties or development. The Project has been
44 conditioned to provide a "Trash Disposal Plan" in order to ensure that the site and area
45 remains well kept and free of debris and trash.
46
47 12. The improvement of any commercial or industrial structure will not have a substantial detrimental
48 impact on the character or value of an adjacent residential zoning district.
49
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 11
1 a) Property zoned Single family Residential (R1) is located to the West of the project site.
2 The Project would upgrade the building, project site, and add new landscaping. The
3 Project has been conditioned to provide a "Trash Disposal Plan" in order to ensure that
4 the site and area remains well kept and free of debris and trash. Based on the above,
5 the Project would not have a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of
6 an adjacent residential zoning district.
7
8 13. The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including
9 trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site.
10
11 a) The proposed project would renovate and upgrade an existing site. The site is comprised
12 primarily of impervious surfaces (parking lot and building) and does not include any water
13 courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat, or other environmentally sensitive areas. The Project
14 includes modifications to the parking lot which would not change the grade. The Project
15 site includes existing landscaping and 13 mature trees. The Project would add two new
16 landscaping planters to the site and no trees would be removed.
17
18 14. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the
19 structure(s)and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box-like uninteresting external appearance.
20
21 a) The Project would upgrade the existing fa�ade on the garage, including adding a fa�ade
22 to the garage (proposed wool mill), varied wall height, and base and access colors, as
23 well as updated signage. These features help to break up the existing building which is
24 consistent with this finding.
25
26 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
27 GILBERT MIXED-USE USE PERMIT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
28 676 SOUTH ORCHARD AVENUE/APN 002-320-53
29 MAY 13T" 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION
30 FILE NO: MUNIS 37
31
32 1. Approval is granted for operation of a small wool mill and food truck including: light
33 manufacturing, retail food sales, as described in the project description and shown on the plans
34 submitted to the Community Development and Planning Department and date stamped March 3,
35 2015, except as modified by the following conditions of approval.
36
37 2. The use permit is granted to operate a Wool Mill and Food truck facility that includes the
38 following uses:
39 1) One Single-Family Residence;
40 2) Wool Mill;
41 3) Food Truck; and
42 4) On site storage is limited to: one (1)40 X 8 feet wide shipping container and one (1)20 X
43 8 feet shipping container; for storage associated with the Wool Mill
44
45 3. The use permit is granted subject to the following operating characteristics:
46 a) The Wool Mill shall operate 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m.
47 to 5:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday;
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 12
1 b) The food truck hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. (or sunrise, whichever is later)to 7:00
2 p.m. (or sunrise, whichever is earlier), 7 days a week;
3 c) The Wool Mill shall have a maximum of four(4) employees per shift;
4 d) The food truck shall have a maximum 2 people per shift
5
6 4. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the following and are subject to staff review and
7 approval:
8
9 a) New location for the existing 8 foot by 40 foot non-conforming storage container;
10 b) Approved location for the proposed 8 foot by 20 foot storage container;
11 c) Specs for the proposed bicycle rack that holds 6 bicycles; subject to staff approval;
12 d) Plant pallet for the proposed 8 foot long galvanized planters;
13 e) Elevations with the approved fa�ade;
14 f) Trash Disposal Plan;
15 g) Directional arrows for circulation; subject to staff approval;
16
17
18 5. Prior to occupancy the following shall be completed and are subject to staff approval:
19
20 h) A pedestrian path; painted as identified on the site plans approved March 03, 2015,
21 subject to staff review and approval;
22 i) A new bicycle rack for six bicycles, shown on the building permit plans shall be installed,
23 subject to staff review and approval;
24 j) The parking lot shall be striped for 8 parking spaces, subject to staff review and approval;
25 k) The new six foot fence for screening the storage containers as shown on the building
26 permit plans shall be installed, subject to staff review and approval;
27 I) Painted directional arrows as shown on the building permit plans shall be installed,
28 subject to staff review and approval.
29
30 6. If complaints are received related to noise the business owner shall take measures to 8 install
31 sound attenuation devices, subject to staff review and approval. This may include 9 a reduction in
32 hours of operation, or potential loss of Use Permit.
33
34 7. Prior to installation of any signs, application for and approval of a sign permit from the
35 Planning and Community Development Department is required.
36
37 8. No outside display of items shall be permitted.
38
39 From Environmental Health (Brian Hov 234-6625)
40
41 Complete food facility plans including manufacturers' material and equipment technical specification
42 sheets, a proposed food menu and a major plan review fee for a permanent food facility will be required
43 to be submitted to the Mendocino County Environmental Health Division for review and approval.
44
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 13
1 From the Electrical Department(Jimmv Lozano 467-5774)
2
3
4 1. Applicant/Owner-Will need to verify size of service panel (i.e. 200A, 400A)for the proposed
5 Wool Mill Building.
6
7 2. Will also require a service panel with Test-By-Pass facilities. Applicant was sent copies of the
8 COUED metering requirements for residential and commercial applications as a reference.
9
10 3. Applicant/Owner-Will need to verify voltage requirements (i.e. 240/120V, 208Y/120V or
11 480Y/277v)for secondary service feeding the proposed Wool Mill Building.
12
13 a) Voltage requirements will need to be verified for the new service panel, whether or not
14 the applicant requires 1-phase or 3-phase power.
15
16 4. Applicant/Owner-Will need to determine estimated power demand load/kVA and load calculation
17 information for the proposed service panel/project.
18 a) Connected kVA and Load calculations -will help facilitate the size and/or number of
19 transformer(s)to be used on the project.
20
21 5. Applicant/Owner-Will need to determine whether or not to have an overhead service or
22 underground service to the new service panel.
23 a) Should the applicant decide to have their service undergrounded, they will be responsible
24 for purchasing of conduit, trenching and installation (per City of Ukiah specifications).
25 b) Should the applicant decide to underground, a utility easement for any secondary
26 electrical equipment and conduits extended into the property(i.e. service panels).
27 Easements must be officially recorded and a copy submitted to the City of Ukiah.
28 c) Should the applicant decide to go with an overhead service, this will necessitate that the
29 new service be at a minimum height of 16' over the driveway/parking lot. The height of
30 the service weather head entrance will ultimately be dependent on several factors, height
31 of new roofline and/or building code requirements. This option only takes into
32 consideration if the new overhead service is run from the COUED utility pole at the NE
33 end of the property.
34
35 6. COUED-Currently does not have 3-phase power at the current address for the proposed project
36 at 676 South Orchard Avenue.
37
38 a) 3-phase power could be brought into the proposed location, but the applicant would be
39 responsible for the additional cost to build a transformer bank (i.e. two or three overhead
40 transformers) mounted on an existing utility pole at the NE end of the property.
41 b) There is one (1)existing I-phase transformer on a COUED utility pole at the SE end of
42 the property, which currently serves ten (10) customers and may need to be upgraded in
43 order to serve the new projected load requirements. Should the applicant request I-phase
44 power instead of 3-phase power it would most likely be upgraded to a larger transformer
45 in order to serve the existing ten (10) customers and the applicant's proposed Wool Mill
46 Building. As an example; the existing transformer is a 1-phase 50kVA 240/120V
47 configuration and the new transformer may be upgraded to a I-phase 75kVA 240/120V or
48 a 1-phase IOOkVA transformer configuration. The size will largely depend on the loading
49 information provided by the applicant.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 14
1 c) The new device would have to traverse over the existing homes roofline by a minimum of
2 8', in order to maintain G.O 95 Standards and any applicable building code standards as
3 well.
4 d) The service panel must be in accord with current EUSERC standards. The
5 contractor/developer shall submit service equipment specification sheets with appropriate
6 EUSERC references for City approval prior to purchase and installation. Contact Steve
7 Beaman, Metering Services Technician, City of Ukiah, (707)467-5779 regarding the
8 panel requirements. Mr. Beaman will be your contact for any metering/panel related
9 issues.
10
11 7. COUED-Will install all secondary conductors from transformer/utility pole to service panel/s and
12 terminate as necessary.
13
14 Standard Citv Conditions of Approval
15
16 9. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use,
17 including but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been
18 applied for and issued/finaled.
19
20 10. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
21 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
22
23 11. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law,
24 regulation, specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal
25 agencies as applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric,
26 plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the
27 time the Building Permit is approved and issued.
28
29 12. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
30 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
31
32 13. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
33 to building permit final.
34
35 14. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
36 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
37 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
38 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
39 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
40
41 15. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
42 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers,
43 attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding brought against
44 any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set aside, void or annul
45 the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages,
46 costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted by any person or entity,
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 15
1 including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's action on this application,
2 whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the part of the City. If, for any
3 reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void or unenforceable by a court of
4 competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
5
� . . . ��:��;�: �
,-�:
� -;..�:.....
; �•��� _
�����;'��� _ t�:��- ����;•��p—
. �-_- _
,;.n.;,�.�... :.. _ _;,,� "�:
,y: >,
..:..: .. �- - �.�-• � •:.
- �,. :.�_,
; � . _. _. .. _ ., �...._..,,._... - ,: - � -- ->.-
. 1�� °�y.fp:.:._.
j}',ti'�:5� yT��'��wr-k,
i�rr.''4
:�r�#����� ��:�:���� _ ... .._ .. _. .
• s=T-:}� ���'7-', ..�r4�.:! ���;i'. }`�.
-1-�:; '
, �.. _.._,. .... . - _ ' _
� . ,.�:
. '•'•
,.i y, .
. ....y. ' -,.-: ... . �... ... ...z .,I.
_ �:�' '
_ . .: ..-. ... - _- .... . . .. .. -. ���:. �:��
t:'t . ._. . . . . .w _. .. . -lr ,-. - .
- J_ _ - -
_ � :..'.�:a.'-'. - '�' ��rsa .. .... . ..c�r� :....'t:,_�' ' -..a ' r
' C' r� . . • ,:h: "`�.. .
�La � �� �3`c;�,:a�-� 176���_ - -- -
- �[�`�'.� • .
v'-� .� -
e . '-�.�.�°—..�,�:"�f; ,. ... ...,. - - . ... ,
-- - _ �_t-'-' ,,{f�_ , .... .{.� . .�'�;�� _�
•• . .�. .Y:: .,. ._.. .._
�. ,+..., ..,. .. ..�.�
. ,. : � : � - - - - -
.�}{�,� l, . .��.:�. . � -
.
-� -
� fmElTN7�:d�:�'� �lJ�C'T�-f_�ra.��' •%' - . _ .
' �.r.'i'� ' �' !�
..�. ` , _
. . . � . :>.. '�f� '•'.
. _":_'r� .. . ' ..:..: 'Y.l � .. r j'. .`_,.._ • �.r.
� ���'��. ., 4��� � ����1EL Y!'��'�
��a�-- . � �' ;,r. �.�L.,,�-
` _ - ;s- .:�,:.� „"��a.'�
r;.�: -
.. .. h: , , ,.
„ . ,
.._ ... . _.,. _ .._ . .: -. -. ,,t--�•....-... . �
� .2
, ...
� ,.,..:;. -� - - _ -
,.�.
:{; _- ,.. , �t 4r.: .., ,., �_. .,
.. :i. „. r. • - _ � '_ _:. .... : ^. --.�.. - - :
� :`. _ ,. •= f - � -
Y. � _:.
,
.., _..
��- : - - : ... } ' � _
:�: r..=
:.:,...'._.... � lf,��I
:E�rfai.a dF-rFi.h�'.-S"���:� - �,s. -.:rr� ` �'.2Fr.�.��' ��} � _
i ,
P - ----: '-�Th::=�= :t�• :a.:; . - _ - -
. f - - ,
.:;�
. . ,}��..:�..._ -��;;f :.,�' .; ',��.,� �p,-y_µ,� it.�� - ' ..... .�.'�
_ _�,
. . . . . .. �_•:. ;.. r. . ... .:.......... .a . ;.:,.y r,- � - . : . - _ -
._.. . ,., . . • �.a
-.. _ ;.. ".�:�,'.e.�a�sw. r - i•' i�€Te�;`eat--
'I- .,,---�-���'-� ;�'��'�i,l�� ....... .,'_���}��.�.��?�..,�—_ .
. . � ' . -
. . .......- ... .r�L_"t - ' . �
, ',�'.:, _ _
.r.».,., e.. _.. ' ..��- --- - ,,�x' -
r`1.' -
_ . .;f�E,¢[�E�- - : {,. � .�. .;_ ..- �� . -
u�h�
� I�fA14�• -01� -- -. - ..
:,�"..., - _ -
� �". �.. � ..,,�_,..-' ` .
6
7
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 16
Michella Jahnron
FlG�YY: J�olyn Post�ja�alynpost�y+aMoo.00mx
;�ne� Wedrr�ey,Mey 13:2015 1�:95 A41
Ta: MP�helle Johnwr�
Su6jeck: Merdo�ino Wvol Mill
H1+.�1k[hPll�,l Affi uVr�ting In�iuppprt 6f thE 15BV1 W061 mill irY lJki3h_I am a small�eep owner and woof prody�g��ysn m
$qlanq{punry,I wou�d lave So nave a moTe aocal mill to ser,d some of my fleeces ta for prarxssing inm roving,yarn and
beLt5 f4f rny hand�7Ad2�dUCtS.CUIYBhtM�,1 Shi��lcrtes to Oregan or Midiigar.
Any[hlnq yrau tan do fo expe�lte Tr1at['S flllll wuulJ Lr grretly appre�ialed hy[he local waol cammunl;y!
iamtyn Pnst
Sheep ta 5hop
$gnS F�qm my IPad
{��CELV��
q�AV }$fGl5
��ax u+u.kr
BUSLlM.YOt�L\NS��0[P,-.=�"+18WP
1
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 17
.�1�terr.�ocir�.v Coz��.t� ,�'�r°�. Bur���
ma,c r��po ne.a.uu.�aa.oeres•1�1�.�ee�•roxpor�aazaeai•emer;��d�
� — �
am�dnd.ixh ihc cdxm,dn Fnmi amneu F,eeratlen ane x,e nn,er]ean Fam�ei..na F.�m�n
1YY1��
h4�y 12,2015
Ci#y of[]kiah Plea�ing Ca�¢issivn
340 S��Ar+�ud
L7aak,CA 95�82
k15,M�y i3,20�5 Pum�t��rsston,�ecnr�r�m 4a
na�C�on�crussionars.
3Y�e Mendocdna Caunty�'asm Bviceau{�7CFB)is a a�o-gqw�mme�n�namproHt,vofuntary
at�nmlr�shdp.advocacy group whase p�pase is ta�atxl u�l u�no{a ag�ioultwdl in�erests
tluoughuut the oounty and to t�nd�alutio�to the problcros facing agrieultuiel busrt�ee�es end the
nnal oommu�ity. MCF'B Aureetly t��e appraxlu�pely 12U4 menthe�x.MCFB wouVd 1�1ac
tn axpre�s suppast fo:the uroal mtia The¢iab¢in$}aaPes�1 b}'a�paacant Mstlhcw Qi]h�'k
As ptopased,me wtw]eaale wnol uull will Lave aa anticippted rmmral pmdupion a��ty o£
m+oimd 24,00�pa�mds of yarn.The�aw wool fleHce meoceif els iseeded Par tha pxaduetioa ef yarn
are planaed ro bc smrmed frant loc�l sheep renahcrs wneu pnss�bl�. Hrving a loaai waa]mill
will suppore•ma tiafe woaY€haep groduocrs ofivFcadooiao County u�d pariiaps oacoura�e other
cammencial flacl�ta look inm gemvfic impravenx+ntx u1 p�er m aell flccces w Mr.Gilbert.
Tlsere is en inareay�llSe nf sl�pp For,paing vreEd opndal vriatin�.�ineyur�s and�ti�ds o1'
Maadncino Cnunty.If iLere is a]ucel woul mti']] #o prpdu�p valuc added�vvduota then there
wvuW be +�aans] econamic lse�lG6t � tho aiwcp �duetry_ 'Ihere +uould be fivther lac�
eaonamic baua�t5 pravidcd throu�thc xulca ot yaiv directiy iFnm l4fr.{�fbert and fram local
yam airope.
Since ucwrding to thc sits dovclupm�ut pnmrit f�dinZa. thc praposad wool nsi]] pt'4jac.i ia
cnnsistrnt with 4ie General Pla�a��nniu�;ardinanxs,MCFB emcavragea the[tiry n£[7kiah
Planviag Co�mi9c�om bo move farwazd with die appruv+x[vf 1he waoi mill sitc dG+�elap�4��,d
vsc pe�nil�-
Si�oe�dy, f��CEfY��
� — �ar i�zais
�'Y OI'II�aA
7vlichaei).Brai�yBt E�AiG1 rLU�rourc bkx.uri�r
PreBide�
te�ze �rta a7e�r� � onlaa�w ZE97S7�J91 �75:�� 5I6L/ZL�59
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 18
� (
ISIm Jordan
frorn: Cemille Betamsn tqa�eanan.carnuic�gneii_wm� • '�
Sent: Md�tlay,56a6em6er 22,265d 9=5fi�
To: I{iril J9fdafl
Su6j�ol: Wool M91�Uklah
IJ�r'�tim 7nrdan:
]t�a my undc:staading thatlhe�uilding ofa woa]mill in 4�e c;iy Uf Uki�h is under eonsiderauan.T would lilce
to let yau 3�sow tl,ai i Hu�urt that cndea3vr,M�ny of my fnen�ls and c�numntity membcrs in Uldah,Radwood
and Potcer Vallcys hare�cvith flaeoes O�at a2 shipped away to 6�pracr�sod,YeamTp Eocal ecanomyloca]
ia i�sporant.1 also Mave friende end cammunity mem6ers wha apend moncy an processod w�9 in thc farm of
yorn and bauia�,fcm knitqng,wcaYing and needle felting.As a ocaches ac It;�,er pu��h�tcr School.I knnw that
when many familics spaud i�souey for�h��chi]dicn's schaal projec�s iheyhuy wooi products that�re n�
praduced locally 6ecause they have no ottier option.T1te rrwaey that�x$p�nt an yam xnd 6atting could be$�
in aur oammunity w���c buildingof a wao]mill in Ilkiah.G7G S.O�char�pv�,�y��$t lxa[ion fm a waa[
mi]]hccause it is centrai end w�uld ba raay far bath wool pruducers and ysrn collswtie�a cu ucccy�,p�ease
support Ihis endeavor ps a wsy to grow lncal a�uaumy und a way fo s�ppar�]ncu]Farrners and craftera_
'T'f�nk yau Far youe oansideration,
Camille Bateman
3851 Fzs[�ide CaEpella Rd,
Ukiah,CA 45482
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 19
[ �
I(im Jordan : �. -- -- - � -
Fram: kgy,pumET�gro811t6m on hehalf of FSay BUrnHt�key�5a}�n9tt.00m>
&ent Fnday,Augual2�,2piA S,82Rh1
7a� I{kn Joroan
Su6ject: FHd:Uklah'A'cd Mil
Follaw lJp Flag: Fnllowup
Flag Statua: Complciea
FYI.--
-----Foru�ardad mcssaga---------
Fm¢n:YGs4y Bornett Qca�Cr�kas+burneii.com�
❑ate'Fri,Aug 29,201d ut 7:7�' AM
5vhject:llk;ah Waal Mill
To:oslu�uufa�citvotuld¢h,00m
Cc�Met9�ex�Gilb�ri{�?inranam�vahoo.com�
Charlfe Stump, Planning Director
My name is Kay Bum�bt.�am a donor lo arw supp❑rteeof IAendxlna Waal&�i�er,a new woo�rnill
in Ukiah owned by Mattend 3arah Gilbart.As you know,Matt hasvrorked wtth you on rnili planning
and permitting!or neariyr nna year, Mlhl suppartels lika me hoped Sh��Matt would meet his goal of the
mill apening 6y Auguet 2fl14,bvt Ihe plann�ng and pemlk lequirements forlhe mlll slte are unclear
and ever�henging_
I reepectfully esk snd ertcaurag�ypu to w4�94 CI4se[y with P,1att ta solidily slle requlr�rr�ents and mill
plans as soqn as possiblg,and to eneble parmitting and 4uifding Co move forward.Nqrthgm C2flfornia
w4ol growe�'S 3nd U.3.m�nuFacturing naad thls wool mlll,which wilf hc a te��flC addklon 6o ihe edy of
Ukeah end surrou�ding ar�a and rural eoannmy.
P�1y husband,�ric Enydahl,a n�tiva Califumian ir�om Santa l3ass,and I vdsiFedlhe mill elte I�st spring
wherl we were in Califvmia,Malt showed us around and enVluslasUCal�y�heted hia plans and vlsions
forihe mlll.tils aperatlon►NII enhsnce the econpmic acUvlly af Ihe oounty,he is erxouraging local
sheep ownera ta use his shcoring skills and eel!their woal.Wa would love to see him tske th$nex�
5teps 6qw�rd hi�r�ream,
�hank you for}mur donsideration,
Kay Burnett,Chicago IL
i
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 20
f i
Klm Jardan �
FMRI: Csfd PSrBRIB"[C�cramer`95$�M41rt1aP.com�
Sent Thursday,Augusl2fi.2014 10:37 qM
Ta: �41m Jurclan
8ub�tt#: FW:Mandcdn0lYool 8 Fihe�
FoNoW llp�q; Fdlow�[p
FWq SYawe: [:ompletad
kiordan�[ih '� e�r h•mm
Fr6m'dcrarngr195$�h4tmall.COm
To:istu r�cRVafuklah.[om
5u4ject;Re;Mendo�i�o Waal&Flber
Oate:Thu,28 Aug 2014 10:35:34•�7dp
d}29r IWf'. Sfurnp
City of Llkiah�faanr'rrg Department,
My name is Carol Krarr�er.!am a[fa�ar to and s�pportar of Men#ocirro INoo1 d,Flf�er, a
new woar mrll i�IJkrah owned by hdatt ar�d 5a�ah Gither'f-As yau krraw,Matt has worked
with yau an mrrr�l�rre�rr�g a��erntitti�g for nearry on9 year.J4fiR supporfera lrke+iTe hoped
rhar�fatt waerrd meet h+s goa!a�[he mr'N openlnQ by August 2�7�, 8ut the ptannrng and
perrni�requiremer�ts fa'tha r�r`1f srle ara�nclear er�d ever ehaaging,
1 respectful�y ask anG encoeuage you fo wnrk cJasely w1Fh A+fa�to s�I[!r{y site req'uine�er�fs
and mi�r p�ans as sonrl as possrble, a�d fa e�t�bfe parmitting�r�d bul7ding tn►i7ov9a t'arward.
NorNtern Galrfamra wool grawers arrd�.5. man�haciu�rng nesd this wool mifl, which wrff be
a terrrflc addition to tMe crty af(lkiah and sum��ndir�g area andruraf ecnrramy.
iCnrtters�rke myself,s,ainr+ers and�r[7er'ar-lrats utrfize woa�and�be�'products#v kee�our
{rrerrds, farr}�r+es as we��a totaf sbar�gers wamr sr�d camforta6fs. 7f�rod�cars do nof have
a vfable meaMS of�rocaessi�g the woal�ber�fleeceJ, fhay haua na ChprCa bt►t to d1SC�1'�M
or use it for erosio�can�n�8y dumpir�g it ia�o ditches.As 1 understand c�rrerrNy, uvoo�is
6e�ng growr�an sf�eep,htifvested hUmartefy and then desfroyed due to 8 Jack od
processirrg faeiflNes. This,to rne,Is&r�6�nrmous w85te afresou�ces. This�n�l�fs rmportant
k
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 21
� t
Kirn Jarden . `. - .. --• _
Fmm: Ldslic Smyth<leylle9�'1yth�sb�lobal.net�
sam= Thuraday,Augva:29,2�id 11;d6 AM
To• 14im Jards n
SuhJ9G: FW:Mendocln4Yroa18ntlFlharPermite
Ynportance: Mlg�i
Falfow Up Fiag: Follaw up
fl�q$�st�6: Campl9�
F6fph+C Fl1C,plcase,#or I am n4k 9Vf[If it is Ms.or Mr.lbrddn,
I dnl f�iwerdmg this len�r i��t ChdTI1B Stump to y�u h2r�U5E I F�21 tir.re is urge�t flOVr and waiting Wnlil CFarlie if qg�
Is moB Lirne spent in delay.s. Pleasc will you F�ok irtn tMIS rnatter of the permlts al 4lendo�ino Wpql aMd Fher and du
S6+riP[hirlg—o r at least hegin d qing Sam e:hi�7 PIeaS€! I Lvl d someo ne,p�Fy Ms If la�ghing,thdt I W 95 lf i inking a 4C�t
t8�in��ly oxygen tank o-n whBC15 and walkeF down;4 y9uY of�'Kes[o makB Ch15 fPyuest in pers4n-�n figured tiia�
w6�ld be a 6it excesslMe,
Please mntae!me shvu�d)mu have any quastinns,
l.esfie H.Smyr�
F7am:L.eslie Smytn ma� s6c I ]
se�:Tn��d�r,���s.�or4 ii:as�
Ta;atu �lal�,[grt�
Suhjer#;Mendoclno waol ana�iher aQ�ps
H�Cnarlie,
1'au rtwst likclydnn't remem6er me,6ut we met qnig o�hwice when I was Prpsld2nt at the Board at:he Fard Street
PY6�ECl.That was a feW yEdfS 8g0. I 5111 Sendi�sg ynu[hk F10t!now he�auie 9f 56rt12thing a hit mp�Lurrent_
anp af ukiah's real prqhlgms ls la[kaf welf-payll�g�7b5[oraur ypu�g men end womea thdt wIIJ enah.+e thern;o S[dy In
ourcommunity ratherthan moving away to mslae a diviqg, Matthew GIPoer!is ooe Ipr�l Young man who is trytng to
thange that pd[te+n,alhelt in a small way, Ai[onsidera6le financlal rlsk tn himselFand hls famfly,he camQ pa��q�3�lah
to 6ggin Mendodno Waol and�herwhi�h wlll not onty provide his famliy with a iiving,quK vAl!also provide needed Jo6s
in ehe enmmUniSy. Ik woukl also help Cnunryrfarmeis wi[h a gopo loca!plaoe[o mfll t4elrwaol.!have h���q;44 meny
stories ahout sen�lfngflee�es away for m�l�ing only to rrce6re bsck fltczo of an entirelyd4fferent oolor aqd texture.,,
o6viously from someone alse's'sM1eep,The1'C Is no questionthe mlll Is badly needed.
hlatt hes�ealfy h'led to meet all the�equir�ments oF;he pe�mlttingand planning p�ucess as they�rn�up. Howevpr,
2heytw�[fnue lu❑ome up and nvwthe en[IrP pmoess is delayed y2�again when the tlming has hecame cnxial(nr
�ontlnued wlablllty of hia entire proJect. H2 hasalwaysppld me how FelQful indlYld�,als m llkiah's pfann3ng 6epartmerrt
haVp 6B�r1;th2 dlf#i�uNy is wjq�the COltkinual app22rgfICR p4 new requireme�j y�idt wer2 npt RIPl1[IOrY�d eariier either
YefbaUy oY In wYiting.The let9st hldep appears tp q�pyer handicapped pafking. Hvw i am quhe handlcapped�ozygen at
4-S L/minuLt and great dif�Ulky welkingJ and E haye ncuef h8d�crydi{�ult}'In e[[255ing the hulfdllyg V1here the rnill will
4e IoceEed.
Would Pt not be possihle to"fs3t�h�tk"the perml�prp�psswit}the underst�ndirgtMax(he requined handlr�pped space
wlil he put in-i�you absalutely must have it7 The r�ason i pu;rtthls way Isthacrhere are 6asinesses;n tawn wl[h tiav
i
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 22
� �
Kirn Jardan �
F�nrn� Sur�SFM1B Psdle�peoffi�so�ne{�
$e�: Thu�eda6S Au9ust 29,201R 3:38 RM
Ta: i4im Jardan
SuhJect: FWd;MCM1tlOtr�o Wool 8 Flber RBrl111tE
Follrnr Up Fleg; Follow iip
F[�y Statuc: Comple6ed
Mr.S�p has rcdirccicd his emails la!roa. Pcrhags yoo cauld help this bus�ncss get esteblishexl. �'hey aure
havc s n�hale conuuunity b:r:k;ng Mhcm with financial supprnt fmm acsnss che caun�ry-
'Thank You.
5uany Fsotn
�.•--O�igin��itasagc--------
Subfect:Mandocino Wool&Fi6erperi�ta
Date:Thu,2$Au�,2p1�15:3D:]�-0?04
�h'am:Sunshinc Pso�Csvso[af�sani�ne[x
T o:c s h c mn Cr�ci riro fuk;ah_c om
C�arlic 5tump,Plaruting I7irecbor,Ci#y of L`ki�lr Plsuning 6egartment,
He21a my name is Sunny Psata and 1 am a resident of 5onoma Caunty,l am n dono�to and
suppnrber of Mendocino Wool&Fiber,a new wno�miil in Ukiah owned 6y Mart and Sarah
Gilhert_As you k,imv,Mart has warkcd with ynu an rnill p[anning and permitting for ncarly one
year-Mili suppaT[ars lilce mt hopcd that Mat�wnufd mcet his goel af the mill❑pcning by Augusl
201�,bat lhe planniug and permit requiremcnts for[he mil]site ere unclear and ever c�anging.
I respeCTFully 7sk s�ld encx�urage yuu to woxk closciy wifli M�St i4 solidEfy aitc requirements arid
1n111 plans as suon aR ixassibie,and to enable permirting and building ta move forwaid,
Northem Californ�a wool gmwe�s and U.S.manuFacturing need ihis woal ini11,which will be e
#erriFic addition lo thc city of[Jkiah and s�utx�unding area and rural eoonom�,
M}�xister and I ar�e iook3ng tarward�a trip to L11daEi thc cnd of Qctober to visit the Sun House,
have lunah.stop by Hc;di's�'am Havan und sce Ariendncino VVool&.Fiber to celebrate my sistct'a
binhday. We are coming from Sanoma Caunty,becAUSe we da not ha�+e a mill hcrc. Like yours,
our county is known for it�sh�e�p,yet each ycar the waol must be s�nt far away tn be processed if it
ia even denl�with.hTan and Sarai�Cilbert h�ve�salurion to keep the wovl in Cal�fio�nia wbile
p�aviding p�nducte tha[mgny wauld want. !f you havc never seen Irnittcrs in a yaru siiop,[hen yau
i
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 23
�
ti'fCSCJ S L�I EII I IULI
�.�}.Yi[]3'i.l.r5
}3f[10�3,`'�!�L��bCJf]
lh'u'4ti',5'YCSI;I ti,C OTTi
.?s7^Ufi�-,3k(;
June 29, 2414
Ip fhe C-Ety oG Llkiah wlanning llepart�e�#=
Jviatt Gilbert has been a pivata I member of my farm's health by coming o�t
once a year and shearing rny flock of inerityc,sheep tfrat turn c}ut tc,haur.tl,e
finast r+.n-+nf ir�thr ct�re fv�a 1hp Fi}�r'rs�rr!y,��yl trctin��rnjr rt}fnr nPaelv a
cfeeade naw.
For ihe past few years Mau has been working an a plan io pui up a fine
fi6ered rvool spinning mill, He has wo�lcetl t�refuUy and sfeadi�y on this
pro�ect in c.on�unction wifn tfie many of us+,vitfirn the area who ship our
wonl to Vermant m he spun_
I hope that you�vill seriously consider the positive impacts on pur
r.nmmiinitv fhat fhi�wnnl miJJ in nlanninp wil] hr�n4 niir wav.
I know] am not alone in wa�ting#his mill fo be up and runni ng saan,
Many thanks for your consideratians,
��lly l ax,
Y`
R�CEIVEA
wner; V seis Ltd JUk. 0 g 291�
c�rs or o�xH
pqaav�a r�.voaowu o�raa7+m�r
1
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 24
Mich€lk Jo6oson
{ity of 4lkiah Planoing I]rflsnmcnt
3flU S�minaTy?.vc_
Ukiah,CA 95482
Va}']3,3A}l5
}i9,lohnann,
I hauc s ahccp fann a,�d fihcr hu9en�s l��Sp�19 CimNy,]am ooe aFinany fiherpmducen u�ha h�ve
62ee rery exti[nd[p knpw il�al wr will h0.r�e 1ni11 in our¢rrn Ih¢i cao pinduoc thc kinds ofyems ou:
coalamsrx�isk fw���n:ue nnxiovx]y waisiog to srnd S6er far pracesang to hc ncw Mcodarino VYoal�
ri6er Mdl en�3iad hoped thal o�s2i715 harves[could hc cerdcdand ePuo lhcr�.?.s i[is�hzt CherhaR b?.e�
boxad up snd will hr shipprd to k]ichigen Ear thr rmcess•.ngthst is reqnifed.
[unde�asand cha�thert have hxo delurs in thr p[anningend�sc�mi;4iri(tpiu�:rxx.Tkiis ix arally wu bad as
tlsi�ncw mil]wilk not only hc a grcec r.sourcc far nmtlwrn Colif�xni�fiba praduce[a but x�ll6e a draw
for fNef pmdutefs hhll]obesumers�6 visi�liki�h and the su�undi¢g urca.In¢ddiliom 1 am a donor ta
this mil]anc]would like uo see ii�a�my suppun has mt 6xn Yorno-thiag.
l I1PpC S}SS}y+q4l N'III dp 2+'4Y)'LI]LGg yiML Wn L4 t1cpCSlll.lhe pf9ce55 60[ha:[hC hrTendnaino l4'aal&Filr�r
Mill will hccmnc a rzali[y. ll vn[Y Ee a win-vnn far all inuo]vod.
'Fhank y�u.
Ro�in Lynde
Mendmnfacohs
781]N_himd�en R�
Vecueillc,C�9i6R8
m6 in Qmen di o uj uco 6s.00m
��������
u�ar 1 s 2ati5
�rs�op,nc�aa
esmm�nrs��7+pm� �,rvnxrFC�cxr
1
2
3 Break: 7:18 p.m.
4 Reconvene: 7:25 p.m.
5
6 10. NEW BUSINESS
7 10A. Draft General Plan Housing Element — Senate Bill 2 (2007) Compliance, Discussion and
8 Direction. Discussion and direction of alternative approaches to complying with Senate Bill 2
9 (2007) in regard to the Draft General Plan Housing Element Update.
10
11 Principal Planner Thompson gave a staff report:
12 • To comply with the provisions of SB2, an amendment to the zoning ordinance is required. Staff is
13 suggesting two potential options that would bring the City into compliance with SB2 and allow for
14 certification of the City's Housing Element. It is important for the City to have a certified Housing
15 Element that cannot be accomplished unless the City complies with the provisions of SB2.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 25
1 • Related to compliance with SB2 and Ukiah's Housing Element, Ukiah is required to provide for
2 homeless shelters by right and staff suggests two options to accomplish this goal as specifically
3 addressed on pages 2 and 3 of the staff report.
4 • Changing the zoning district (Manufacturing zones) to allow homeless shelters is a `straight
5 forward' process requiring a zoning ordinance amendment where no corresponding zoning maps
6 need to be modified.
7 • Related to Option 1 (amend Manufacturing District to allow homeless shelters by right), staff is of
8 the opinion parcels zoned `Manufacturing' in town do provide the best locations for homeless
9 shelters and referred to the maps.
10 • Related to Option 2 (create a zoning overlay district), staff is of the opinion there would be less
11 predictability as to location.
12 • As the maps suggests, homeless shelters could by allowed by right in many locations.
13 • Requests the Commission review the two options and provide direction to staff in this regard.
14 • Based on the Commission's direction, staff will prepare a zoning ordinance amendment to bring
15 the City in compliance with SB2 for approval by City Council.
16
17 Commission reviewed the proposed two options and commented:
18
19 Commissioner Watt:
20 • Is there a square footage minimum for the overlay, option 2 scenario to meet the requirements for
21 compliance with SB2? How do existing facilities factor in? Does the requirement for establishing
22 an overlay and/or methods of allowing for a homeless shelter by right say that the facility has to
23 be new area of new development? For example, if a homeless shelter currently exists in an area
24 that has been chosen for the overlay and it takes up all the space for development does this then
25 negate the overlay's compliance with SB2 regulations? Finds it likely necessary go through an
26 analysis to make certain an established overlay has services such as access for traffic purposes,
27 water, sewer hook-up etc. If consideration is not given in this regard then the `rezoning' might be
28 compliant with the rule but not `meet the spirit of the rule.'
29 • How big an area is to be considered, i.e., 5, 10, 20 acres?
30 • Have any property owners stepped forward and volunteer to have their property selected for a
31 homeless shelter?
32
33 Chair Whetzel:
34 • Noted once a shelter is proposed for development at a certain location project would still have to
35 go through the necessary analysis/studies to make certain it complies with the applicable zoning
36 regulations whether it is Option 1 or Option 2.
37
38 Commissioner Hilliker:
39 • Looking at the overlay area/district asked if any of the proposed area is located in the County
40 because the Brush Street Triangle areas are City and County owned and how would this come
41 into play?
42
43 Commissioner Christensen:
44 • Questioned the intent of SB2 other than Ukiah will allow the construction of a homeless shelter by
45 right. What is the bigger picture?
46
47 Principal Planner Thompson:
48 • Related to Option 2 and necessary square footage: The rule is there has to be sufficient vacant or
49 redevelop-able land available to construct a homeless shelter sufficient for Ukiah's needs.
50 • Existing facilities do not factor into the discussion. The intent of SB2 is to make certain there is at
51 least one zoning designation or some type of overlay that would allow a homeless shelter by
52 right.
53 • The City has adopted operating standards for homeless shelters so this aspect is already in
54 place. Use permit or not any homeless shelter would have to adhere to these standards. Some
55 examples of the operating standards include sufficiently addressing distance from schools, size of
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 26
1 building, hours of operation and/or other related standards such that regardless of a use permit or
2 not there are still standards in place that any homeless shelter would have to comply with.
3 • Related to compliance with SB2, for instance, could not take the Ford Street Project property and
4 make just this property an overlay. This would be considered `spot zoning.' While he does not
5 have a solid answer about the technical aspects of establishing an overlay, knows we cannot just
6 take one parcel and make this an overlay. In his discussion about SB2, California Department of
7 Housing and Community Development(HCD) was not clear on compliance as this relates Ukiah's
8 situation concerning the establishment of an overlay and would need more information in this
9 regard. If we go with the overlay scenario cannot just go with one parcel and say this is Ukiah's
10 overlay. The overlay district would have to be a geographically defined area.
11 • Related to a required services analysis for an overlay, a constraints analysis would not be
12 necessary. For a City of Ukiah's size we are fortunate to have services available which may not
13 be the case in other cities. SB2 is essentially tied to the Housing Element so this is HCD's
14 method of getting cities to comply. HCD will not certify a Housing Element unless that city
15 complies with SB2.
16 • According to HCD a site considered for construction of a homeless shelter must be within an area
17 that can effectively accommodate Ukiah's needs.
18 • For the overlay scenario (Option 2)the area would include Ford Street together with the industrial
19 area to the north.
20 • Confirmed the proposed overlay area is located in the City limits; The overlay area would not
21 include the Brush Street Triangle, but rather is located more to the east.
22 • Related to the bigger picture, every city and county is required to comply with SB2. This bill was
23 likely formulated because cities were not allowing or wanting homeless shelters in their
24 communities and using zoning tools to keep them out. Additionally, requiring approval of a use
25 permit made it difficult for homeless shelters to be approved in certain jurisdictions. With SB2
26 makes it possible for cities to select one district where shelters are allowed by right and without
27 approval of a use permit.
28 • Confirmed no one has volunteered his/her land.
29
30 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:36 p.m.
31
32 Jaclyn Williams, Executive Director of Ford Street:
33 • Provided statistical data concerning the Ford Street Project Winter Shelter and is included in the
34 minutes as attachment 2.
35 • For a while our community had a year-round homeless shelter. However, when funding began to
36 be withdrawn at the federal level, the City lost its funding as did most communities. As such,
37 communities ended up with smaller shelters or having just winter shelters and/or temporary
38 shelters that last only three or four months. Opening a temporary winter shelter is not an easy
39 task and they are typically much smaller than a permanent shelter. The Buddy Elder Center was
40 designed to support 64 persons. This facility no longer functions as a homeless shelter and noted
41 when this shelter was open it created an impact for the Wagonseller Neighborhood. Persons
42 using the facility would exit the site via the Wagonseller Neighborhood.
43 • The intent of a homeless shelter is to `create a home environmenY for persons as much as is
44 possible such that there is not this mass exit though neighborhoods when the shelter hours are
45 over.
46 • Even with SB2, Ford Street is not eligible to apply for any federal funding and would need City
47 assistance so does not know what kind of impact this would have with compliance of SB2. As it is
48 now, cannot apply for federal assistance without approval of a use permit that Ford Street already
49 has.
50 • The City co-sponsored one-half of the winter homeless shelter this year. The statistical
51 information in attachment 2 provides data concerning operation of the winter shelter relative to
52 the number of users and the services provided thereof.
53
54 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:40 p.m.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 27
1 Commission noted a discrepancy regarding the maps on page 2 of the staff report for this agenda item in
2 that they are the same.
3
4 Commission reviewed the maps and discussed certain areas in the Manufacturing Zoning Designation
5 and those that would work for an overlay scenario that could accompany homeless shelters allowed by
6 right and found option 2 to be the most practical approach.
7
8 Commission consensus:
9 • Preference is Option 2 alternative for SB2 compliance with Ford Street being included as part of
10 the overlay area.
11 • Staff to proceed with next step in bringing forth a Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Planning
12 Commission review.
13
Att�:hmer� ;; �
STATISTI�� -�ord S#reet Prajec#Winter Sheltar
Operstion:12r11175-4l12�18 �ec Jan Feh March ,4�ri� TOTAL
Inlskes Qurin the Mont� llndu licated fi5 G{'i 4� �2 7F 21�
Average Betf Perpay Count 23 35 43 47 a1 189
Numbor nf Children?.d�ed duri Ihe hlonlh Undu Ik�ted 3 2 � 2 4 9
�venin hleuls Servecl 138 315 3-04 a23 82 13�2
Bed Nighls 484 1ff92 121i F�88 A51 �1726
Chronleal liamelass 38 3fl 2B 12 d 111
hiendaainv Caun€y Residents 64 64 38 3i ii 248
Out af Caun Resldenls 1 2 d 1 0 8
Nv In�m� 92 16 13 7 n �2
Persans P.e�arting hAanlaf Ellness 2d 34 21 1s 3 Q�
Persone with pru and+arAlovhal Issues 25 45 23 17 5 11
Persons with�ual Ui osis 18 2fi 15 8 t d13
Persane with Ph aical pisabilities 18 27 17 15 a 81
Persans with domesGc Vlafence Issues ia 22 12 7� 4 ��
Rgf91'I'dl�Prqvl�{g{{ 2S0 247 1$B 133 1G4 99-0
Persvrra Receiving MediCal or CMSP 45 dd 24 8 4 113
Persans WhoAchieved Housin 0 V 4 4 2 1
Perabns whv vrere awarded TANF,GA,SSI,SSA,SS�I Vet iunding 0 35 2 a o �5
Persons wha rnafntalned oF sacured em lo ern d $ a 3 0 14
pereons whv seeured medioal coverage{Medi aai,CSMP,employerJ 4 36 3 8 0 4
Number o!adults who have slablfzed a Mf pr AO��or 3p+days p 7 11 12 0 9
AUU3T14F1A�CATdG4RlES MAY BE ROOEU
$I�ns 4 5 2 1 2 1-0
14
15 11. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
16 • Gave an update on City projects and talked about upcoming Planning Commission projects.
17 • Commissioner Pruden was very active in our community and she gave in so many ways by
18 serving/participating in many programs/committees/community-oriented organizations. Her
19 service as a Commissioner on the Planning Commission and for her extraordinary efforts/work in
20 our community will be greatly missed.
21
22 12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
23 Commissioner Hilliker:
24 • Found the recent tour and discussion about safety concerning city streets and crosswalks to be
25 very interesting and educational.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 28
1
2 13. ADJOURNMENT
3 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
4
5
6 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
7
8
9
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION May 13, 2015
Page 29