HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_10282015 Final 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 October 28, 2015
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair
7 Christopher Watt
8 Mark Hilliker
9 Laura Christensen
10 Linda Sanders
11
12 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
13 Kevin Thompson, Principal Planner Listed below, Respectively
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 October 14, 2015 meeting are included for
26 review and approval.
27
28 Chair Whetrel made the following correction:
29 • Page 6, Line 1, `Chair Whetzel' should read `Commissioner Hilliker.'
30
31 M/S Sanders/Watt to approve October 14, 2015 minutes, as amended. Motion carried (5-0).
32
33 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
34
35 6. APPEAL PROCESS
36
37 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commission
38
39 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE-Confirmed by Staff.
40
41 9. PUBLIC HEARING
42 9A. Redwood Tree Carwash Site Development Permit, 859 N. State Street,
43 (File No. 1257-SDP-PC). Request for Planning Commission approval of a Major Site
44 Development Permit to allow the renovation of the existing fa�ade, parking facility, landscaping,
45 and signage at the existing Redwood Tree Carwash, APN: 002-091-17.
46
47 Commissioner Watt recused himself.
48
49 Assistant Planner Johnson gave a staff report and PowerPoint presentation to include the following:
50 • Project description as provided for on page 1 of the staff report and applicanYs project description
51 received by staff on September 15, 2015 as discussed/addressed in attachment 3, revised site
52 plans in attachment 9, and emails to staff dated October 21 & 22, 2015 from Ed Blair (Tunnel
53 Vision), applicanYs representative.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 1
1 • Drew attention to additional information emailed to the Planning Commissioners on October 28,
2 2015 prior to the Planning Commission meeting with regard to:
3 ■ Revised draft Site Development Permit Findings 13 & 14;
4 ■ Added draft Site Development Permit Conditions of Approval 11 & 12;
5 ■ Table 4 Staff Analysis Design Guidelines Commercial Projects Outside the Downtown
6 District;
7 • State Water Board Comments dated September 22, 2105.
8 • Site has three uses: 1) Redwood Tree Service station that includes oil changes, tire services, etc.
9 2) Nelson Auto Glass; 3) Existing carwash.
10 • Explained the existing carwash operation and proposed renovation that includes removal of the
11 north wash bay and extension of south bay to the east 20 feet adding 360 square feet/new
12 equipment room that will be added along the north wall, addition of wash lane entrance and
13 addition of wash lane exit.
14 • Referred to the proposed landscape plan and explained the plan includes 17 new trees and new
15 landscape islands for a total of 2,488 sq. ft. of landscaping that essentially provides for a 2°/o
16 landscaping coverage.
17 • Referred to the proposed parking plan and explained 34 parking spaces are required and 32 are
18 existing where the applicant is requesting an exception to the parking standard to allow for 32
19 parking spaces as opposed to 34. Being in the car wash/service station/car repair business for
20 many years applicant does not have a need for many parking spaces such that customers come
21 by appointment or come to get a car repair/wash and then leave and does not operate like a retail
22 establishment. The on-site parking needs are essentially to accommodate the employees.
23 • The project meets the requirements for the eight proposed stacking queues and showed the
24 location. The applicant has indicated that on a maximum shift 10 employees will be on-site.
25 • Related to signage, for aesthetic reasons the DRB wanted to see more uniform consistency/unity
26 with regard to the signage. The project includes new signage as shown in the examples in
27 attachment 3 of the staff report. While information has been requested from the applicant
28 regarding the need for a sign program, the applicant has not fully complied in this regard. As
29 such, staff cannot make a determination whether or not the signage is consistent with the Sign
30 Ordinance standards. Condition of Approval #8 provides that prior to the placemenUinstallation of
31 any signs the applicant shall make an application for and receive approval of a sign permit. Any
32 signage shall be in substantial conformance with the conceptual signs approved by the Planning
33 Commission. Staff is asking the Planning Commissioners provide direction regarding what they
34 want to see for signage.
35 • Based on staff's analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan goals/polices,
36 zoning ordinance/major site development permit requirements and design guidelines with the
37 exception of 1) parking where applicant is seeking a reduction from the required 34 parking
38 spaces to 32 parking spaces; 2) landscaping where applicant is reducing the landscaping
39 requirements from 20% coverage to 2% coverage. With regard to the issue of signage, staff was
40 unable to make a determination regarding Sign Ordinance consistency because more information
41 was necessary in this regard.
42 • Related to environmental review, noted the CEQA determination in the staff report was not
43 consistent with the language in Finding #13 and requires modification. The CEQA exemption
44 includes CEQA sections 15301, 15304 and 15311 which make this project exempt from CEQA.
45 • The issues to be addressed by the Commission tonight are: 1) landscaping 2) parking 3) signage
46 based on DRB's recommendation to find a more uniform exhibit of the signs.
47 • Related to the Condition of Approval #4 regarding a final parking plan, noted a final parking plan
48 must be drawn to scale and submitted and approved prior to issuance of the building permit in
49 order to confirm the size and design of the parking area.
50 • Applicant must submit a final landscaping plan as provided for in Condition of Approval #5 that
51 must be approved prior to issuance of the building permit for modification to the car wash
52 structure based on DRB Member Thayer's recommendation as provided for in attachment 4 of
53 the staff report.
54 • The project is required to provide for an irrigation plan as part of the final landscaping plan that is
55 consistent with the Cal Green Building Code.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 2
1 • Three bicycle parking spaces are required for the project.
2 • Condition of Approval # 8 requires prior to the placemenUinstallation of any sign(s), the applicant
3 shall make application for and receive approval of a sign permit. Any signage shall be in
4 substantial conformance with the conceptual signs approved by the Planning Commission.
5 • Staff is recommending project approval based on the revised draft Findings in attachment 1 and
6 subject to the revised draft Conditions of Approval in attachment 2. Again, staff is asking whether
7 the Commission's preference is to have a sign program formulated for review and final approval
8 by the Planning Commission or a sign permit application approved by staff.
9 • Outdoor lighting has been proposed for the outside of the new car wash structure for security
10 purposes. Outdoor lighting is specifically addressed in Condition of Approval#10.
11 • Condition of Approval #12 has been included in response to State Water Board comments dated
12 09-22-2015 concerning suggest elements for soil and groundwater management plan.
13
14 Commissioner Hilliker:
15 • Asked about the 20% increase in water usage with the proposed improvements to the car wash
16 facility.
17 • Related to attachment 3, Car Washing and Polishing Registration document, noted this permit
18 expired December 13, 2015 and asked whether this permit has been renewed and is existing.
19 • Related to the self-serve wash station and in getting to this destination customers must pass
20 through existing `parking 4' as shown on the parking plans and asked how this works, particularly
21 for exit purposes and whether customers would have to cross traffic from the other wash area?
22 • Requested clarification the `four' parking spaces on the parking plan are counted as parking
23 spaces in connection with the required parking for the project.
24
25 Commissioner Christensen:
26 • Related to consistency with the City's 20% landscaping coverage requirement and requested
27 clarification if the applicant were to reach the 20°/o required what is the square footage and is this
28 based on all three APN numbers?
29 • Asked staff to define `parking IoY and `parking area.'
30
31 Commissioner Sanders:
32 • Requested clarification the proposed landscaping for the project is at 2%. It appears the
33 emphasis for the landscaping is on `screening' with vegetation rather than `shade' with trees and
34 asked for clarification in this regard.
35 • Related to the landscape islands is staff of the opinion this would improve on-site traffic/
36 circulation on the site?
37 • Related to the parking accommodations on the site asked where the employees will park.
38
39 Chair Whetzel:
40 • Related to signage and the City Sign Ordinance asked about the intent of the signage and
41 whether it would be directed toward advertising or more for informational/directional purposes.
42
43 Assistant Planner Johnson:
44 • The 20% increase in water usage is based upon the applicanYs estimation concerning water
45 usage and requested this question be deferred to the applicant.
46 • Has consulted with Public Works Department concerning the potential for an increase in water
47 usage for the project.
48 • Related to the Car Washing and Polishing Registration, defer to applicant.
49 • Confirmed the 20°/a landscaping coverage pertains/affects the one parcel being improved (middle
50 parcel) and based upon staff's calculation taking into consideration other relevant factors such as
51 the existing development on the parcel the landscaping is at 7°/o coverage.
52 • Related to providing shade for the parking lot, clarified the parking accommodation is not defined
53 as a `parking IoY but rather a `parking area.' As such, does not trigger the 50% shade coverage
54 requirement for parking lots. Of the 17 new trees chosen for the project, four are shade trees with
55 the remaining number intended for aesthetic purposes of which three of the tree species are
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 3
1 confirmed from the City's Master Tree List. Crape Myrtle will be utilized as a live fence instead of
2 a wooden or chain link fence and showed the location. Essentially the landscaping is intended for
3 aesthetic/screening purposes as customers are directed through the car wash experience.
4 • Confirmed traffic/circulation will be improved on the site with the proposed project by providing
5 more explicit direction to customers and explained how so, particularly with facility improvements
6 and addition of entrance/exit wash lanes.
7 • Related to the parking plan, requested applicant address parking on the site.
8 • While no formal sign program or permit application has been submitted for signage, it appears
9 sign is similar to the Burger King remodel project where the signage was more
10 informational/directional than for advertisement purposes.
11 • Related to parking lots and analysis thereof is based on a certain number of parking spaces.
12 Referred to the parking plan and noted much of the parking designated areas are represented as
13 'existing parking' and/or as a parking area rather than a parking lot by City code definition.
14 • Applicant can provide information regarding traffic flow on-site with regard to access and exit from
15 the car wash facilities.
16 • Confirmed the `four' parking spaces are counted as part of the 32 total existing parking spaces
17 that are proposed. No parking plans were submitted drawn to scale.
18
19 Principal Planner Thompson:
20 • While the City's 20°/o landscaping coverage requirement is good requirement, it is easier to
21 achieve when a project is coming from the `ground up.' In the case of the Redwood Tree Car
22 Wash, there are different uses/businesses going on for the site that consists of three parcels
23 where achieving the 20% landscaping is more difficult because of the existing development.
24 • Staff is of the opinion and has determined requiring 20% landscaping coverage would be difficult
25 for a site with existing businesses.
26
27 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:23 p.m.
28
29 Ed Blair, Tunnel Vision, Project Engineer, Applicant's Representative is present to answer
30 Commission questions.
31
32 Commissioner Sanders:
33 • Has reviewed the replacement signs and asked how many signs will be removed?
34 • Asked about the location where the employees will park.
35 • Asked about maintenance plans concerning the storm drain inlet filters. It is unclear how the
36 maintenance program will function.
37 • Requested location of the bicycle rack.
38
39 Commissioner Hilliker:
40 • Asked about the status of expired Car Washing and Polishing Registration permit and whether or
41 not this has been renewed.
42 • Asked about how exiting will work with regard to the self-serve car wash operation.
43 • Asked if traffic generates from the east end of the self-serve facility and notes this area appears
44 to be restrictive with parking at the bottom and along the fence line in connection with the line of
45 vehicles going into proposed car wash as shown on the parking plan. What is the proposal for
46 getting these vehicles out of self-serve and back out onto State Street?
47 • Asked about the need/use for a driveway located at the southern portion of the subject property.
48
49 Commissioner Christensen:
50 • Related to the parking plan and regardless whether or not the plan is drawn to scale, the `4
51 existing parking spaces' does affect the flow of traffic. Has been to the car wash and observed
52 whether a person is washing his/her own car or an attendant is washing the car for a person, you
53 go out and turn north and into the middle where all the queuing is to occur. Would like
54 clarification cars will be able to get out of the self-service bays safely.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 4
1 Ed Blair:
2 • No formal sign program has been proposed and will consult with the applicant in this regard about
3 those signs that will be replaced and those that will be removed in connection with the square
4 footage allowed for signage.
5 • Related to the parking plans, 'existing parking (15)' is where employees will park.
6 • Confirmed the property owner maintains the storm drain inlet filters. In terms of a maintenance
7 program for the storm drain inlet filters would have to defer to the applicant and/or monitoring
8 specialists for this information. Has knowledge the storm drain inlet filters are being maintained.
9 • Referred to the parking plan and the shaded area adjacent to the Office' as the location for the
10 bicycle parking. Bicycle parking is essentially for the benefit of the employees.
11 • Related to the Car Washing and Polishing Registration permit status would have to defer to the
12 applicant/owner.
13 • The self-serve car wash coordinates effectively with the automated car wash in that it is located
14 on its own parcel and is separated from the car wash operation that is proposed to be improved.
15 This car wash operation really has nothing to do with the self-serve car wash operation and is a
16 standalone, self-sustaining business. As such there will be no traffic interference with this
17 operation and explained how traffic circulation will work.
18 • The proposal is for vehicles to go south and then westerly out to the street.
19 • Confirmed there is an existing driveway at the southern portion of the property.
20 • The distance from the southern wall pertinent to the self-serve facility is 16 feet and while this
21 narrows it is more than adequate in terms of providing for adequate circulation on-site. Do not
22 want customers getting in queue going to the self-serve wash. The purpose of the break in the
23 curve as shown on the parking plan is essentially for safety purposes in terms of spacing and
24 maintaining appropriate queuing as customers continue through the car wash process.
25
26 Greg Martyn, Property Owner/Applicant is available to answer questions from the Planning
27 Commissioners.
28
29 Commissioner Sanders:
30 • Asked about the plans regarding the fifth-wheel vehicle and shipping containers located near the
31 existing parking and whether they will remain on-site?
32 • Is there a person living on the site?
33 • Requested clarification there is no plan to develop the area east of the proposed car wash?
34 • Asked about the maintenance program currently in place regarding the storm drain inlets.
35 • Where will trash dumpsters be located?Will the dumpster be visible?
36 • Asked about signage and what type of signage is being proposed. Noted the DRB recommended
37 architecturally unifying the design and color scheme for the signage to provide for some
38 continuity/harmony with regard to the existing historical Redwood Tree museum/gas
39 station/proposed new car wash and existing gas station repair operation signage whether it is a
40 paint palate or some other design feature to integrate the historical redwood tree museum gas
41 station theme. Asked if hunter green and/or red is a consideration as this is the existing color
42 theme for the historical museum gas station. It appears the colors displayed in the staff report
43 concerning the directional signs for the proposed project are not architecturally compatible with
44 other signage on the site, particularly the historical Redwood Tree museum Gas Station.
45 Supports the concept of unifying the properties relative to signage.
46
47 Chair Whetzel:
48 • The trash receptacles referenced are not dumpsters but rather cans where trash is collected as
49 work is being done. Asked if there are dumpsters on the site?
50
51 Commissioner Hilliker:
52 • Related to exiting the site, strongly recommends signage be provided for the self-serve wash to
53 indicate direction to exit so that customers can safely maneuver on the site.
54 • Understands a portion of the business provides for engine detail etc., and asked about the
55 location.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 5
1 • Is there the likelihood for the development of another building on the site?
2
3 Commissioner Christensen:
4 • Asked about the car wash operation, after the car is washed and comes out of the bay and into
5 the area to get the inside cleaned does the customer exit the car and go sit somewhere until the
6 detail process is completed?
7 • Regarding the information about signage as provided for in attachment 3 of the staff report, asked
8 if this is the proposed idea? Finds concept of the sign examples to be obtrusive in that they have
9 bright colors and are cartoon-like. Is this what comes with the car wash signage package? Is the
10 applicant `open' to changing the theme of the signage package as shown in the attachment 3, if
11 this is an option.
12
13 Chair Whetzel:
14 • Is there a plan to provide a cover over the area where customers are waiting for their cars?
15
16 Principal Planner Thompson:
17 • Confirmed the DRB is interested in `unifying' the signage as to theme/content with the other
18 businesses on the parcels.
19
20 Assistant Planner Johnson:
21 • Has not received a revised sign plans since the DRB reviewed the proposed project. What was
22 provided for in the agenda packet is the original sign plan. Would not want the Commission to
23 consider signage that was not what the DRB recommended because she has not received
24 anything different.
25
26 Greg Martyn, Applicant& Business/Property Owner:
27 • The fifth-wheel trailer will be eliminated. No decision has been made regarding the shipping
28 containers.
29 • Confirmed someone is living on the site.
30 • Confirmed there is no plan to develop the east side of the proposed car wash.
31 • Has a program where `solids' are collected in different traps and handled/disposed of by a
32 professional agency that deals with environmental-related matters. The frequency of visits
33 depends upon the volume of solid build-up in the traps.
34 • Explained the location of the dumpsters that would be in the interior of the lot where work is being
35 done.
36 • Confirmed the trash receptacles are cans.
37 • The matter of signage has not yet been specifically addressed. Is aware of
38 instructional/directional signs being considered for the car wash of various sizes and shapes that
39 are not advertising signs, examples of which are included in attachment 3 of the staff report.
40 • Has not made a determination about the signage, i.e., as to what the colors scheme might be.
41 Has not yet discussed signage with the DRB.
42 • Confirmed dumpsters do exist on the site and close to '(1) Existing Parking' as shown on the
43 parking plans and screened from view from the street.
44 • Confirmed no determination has been made concerning the location of the engine detail etc.,
45 component of the business.
46 • Is hopeful the proposed renovation will be successful such that the business can further expand
47 to include the addition of more building(s).
48 • Confirmed the customer would have to exit the vehicle while the detailing is being done.
49 • The area where customers wait for their cars has a lattice cover.
50 • Acknowledged the signage to be a `packaged' concept where no decision has been made as to
51 what approach will be taken concerning signage. Would be open to changing the theme/colors
52 scheme of the signage package.
53 • Confirmed the Redwood Tree Car Wash is current on all operating permits, i.e., Car Washing and
54 Polishing Registration.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 6
1 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:45 p.m.
2
3 Commissioner Sanders:
4 • Is of the opinion the proposed project is an improvement to what is existing.
5 • Appreciates that the owner wants to expand the business and improve the customer experience.
6 • Likes the idling of cars will be reduced with the proposed site layout.
7 • Understands the expansion of the business will increase water usage.
8 • Has concern about the lack of trees on the site but understands the car wash operation needs to
9 move around a great deal of vehicles on the site such that trees would impede this operation.
10 • Is not pleased with the signage, particularly the `Pay Here' sign illustrated in attachment 3. Would
11 like to see signage that complements/combines well with the signs of the other businesses on the
12 site and is less obtrusive/garish.
13
14 Chair Whetzel:
15 • The `Pay Here' sign appears to be a cover and asked about the associated lighting.
16
17 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED: 6:47 p.m.
18
19 Ed Blair:
20 • Confirmed the `Pay Here' sign is where customers pay for the services. The intent is to provide
21 for a canopy to screen from the sun to help customers read the screens when paying for services.
22 This sign also has a height restriction sign to alert customers of oversized vehicles there is a 7'2"
23 height restriction.
24 • The different signs that direct/provide information to customers are basically a `template' and/or
25 are examples and do not necessarily represent the actual signs that will be selected. The design
26 forms come in different colors and are only suggestions. No decision has been made about the
27 signage. It is likely a green color scheme can be selected as the base color that will help unify the
28 signage on the site. The sign products exhibited in attachment 3 can be customized as to form
29 and size that can be purchased.
30
31 Chair Whetzel:
32 • Asked about the payment operation.
33 • Is it possible to customize the signage to a `Redwood Tree' theme? Preference would be to have
34 hunter green and red to match the historical Redwood Tree museum gas station signage in terms
35 of matching color schemes.
36
37 Ed Blair:
38 • Payment is `auto pay.'
39 • Confirmed the artwork on the forms can be customized. The purchaser has to approve the
40 artwork on the forms. There are various options available.
41 • Intent is for the entry to the car wash to be recognized without `hesitation.' It is important
42 customers know where to go.
43
44 Chair Whetzel:
45 • The concern for the Commissioners is that the actual signage is not what is shown in the
46 examples.
47 • In addition to the informational signs will there be signs intended to advertise?
48
49 Commissioner Christensen:
50 • Related to the sign examples are some intended to be installed inside the car wash?
51
52 Commissioner Hilliker:
53 • Referred to the photo simulation of the proposed project on page 1 of attachment 3 to be very
54 aesthetically pleasing. As such, is of the opinion the signage should have a closer `relationship'
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 7
1 with the design and color scheme of the building as opposed to the sign examples given. Finds
2 the examples and corresponding color schemes to be not a good fit.
3
4 Ed Blair:
5 • Confirmed there are 10 to 15 different color options for the signs.
6 • None of the signs are inside the car wash and explained more or less how they would be
7 situated, some of which will be under the canopy sign, such as the menu sign.
8 • Most of the signage is for operational purposes.
9 • Addressed the square footage allowed for signage and noted the owner will come up with a
10 comprehensive sign program/package for staff to review for consistency with the Sign Ordinance
11 regulations.
12
13 Assistant Planner Johnson:
14 • Since a formal sign program/application has not been submitted, recommends the Planning
15 Commission provide direction how to proceed regarding signage. Asked if it is the preference of
16 the Commission to require a comprehensive sign program for review by DRB with a
17 recommendation for approval by either the Planning Director OR the Planning Commission or
18 have the applicant go through the sign application process for review and approval by staff.
19 • In addition to the signs to be considered for the car wash there is other existing signage on the
20 site that needs to come into conformance. A full assessment of the signage for the project needs
21 to be done. Even though the parcel is large it has a limited linear footage street frontage that
22 affects the maximum square footage allowed for signage.
23
24 Chair Whetzel:
25 • Asked if the signage is based solely on the proposed car wash.
26 • Observed much of the signage is on the self-serve facility.
27
28 Assistant Planner Johnson:
29 • Confirmed the maximum square footage allowed for signage includes all the signage on the
30 parcel where the car wash is located. Most of the signage for the site and/or other businesses is
31 on the parcel where the car wash is located. There is very little signage on the north and south
32 sides of the business complex/development.
33 • Understands the existing signage on the self-service facility elevation will be removed. Again,
34 since no sign program/application has been submitted do not know the square footage to
35 determine compliance with the Sign Ordinance requirements.
36
37 Commissioner Sanders:
38 • If fine with the matter of signage going through the DRB and working with staff to make sure the
39 signage is in compliance with the Sign Ordinance without further review of the project by the
40 Planning Commission.
41
42 Chair Whetzel:
43 • Does not support the project needs further review by the DRB as it pertains to signage in that this
44 creates another layer of review that is unnecessary. Planning Commission can come up with a
45 signage plan and provide direction to staff so that staff can review and approve the sign
46 permit/program without having to come back to the Planning Commission or DRB.
47 • Would like to see signage that reflects the theme and color palate of the historical Redwood Tree
48 museum gas station as opposed to not being `so flashy' as shown in the examples.
49
50 Commission consensus concerning signage:
51 • Applicant applies for a sign permit based on the maximum square footage allowed by the Sign
52 Ordinance.
53 • Signs should unify/reflect the theme/color palate of the historic Redwood Tree museum Gas
54 Station building by`toning down' the color palate/design in the examples.
55 • Not necessary for DRB to review sign program. Staff review and approve the sign permit.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 8
1 Principal Planner Thompson:
2 • Understands the direction from the Planning Commission regarding color/basic theme for the
3 signage. A determination has to be made concerning the maximum square footage allowed for
4 signage for the site.
5 • The applicant would have to apply for a sign permit the Planning Director can approve based on
6 the Planning Commission's direction.
7
8 Ed Blair:
9 • Would be amenable to working with the sign company to comply with the Planning Commission's
10 recommendations.
11
12 Daniel Brown:
13 • Is a proprietor of the first Bay Area green certified garage in Sonoma County. Has no affiliation
14 with the proposed project and is present to state that as a business owner is an advocate of
15 green business practices.
16 • Related to the point Commissioner Sanders raised about water consumption increasing and that
17 this would be okay because of the increase in business, noted this to be a common
18 misconception. The misconception is that more water will be used with the increase in business.
19 However, if one focuses on this locally, the City of Ukiah's water consumption should decrease in
20 that people may take advantage of the car wash facility services and not wash their cars at home
21 thus consuming more water overall. The intent of a car wash facility is not to take a non-car
22 washing person and make them into one. The objective of an efficient, clean, well-run, well-
23 signed and attractive car wash facility is to give the person who would normally wash his/her car
24 at home the opportunity to go to the car wash. While a car wash may use more water its
25 efficiencies would have a positive net effect on the community. The University of Texas
26 conducted a study and found for a typical car wash facility at home uses about 120 gallons of
27 water compared to a commercial car wash using an express type of apparatus that can take the
28 number of gallons of water consumed down to 20 to 40 gallons, which constitutes a substantial
29 savings.
30
31 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:03 p.m.
32
33 Commission consensus regarding signage:
34 • Less flashy/garish color scheme and more in keeping with the color palate and theme of the
35 historical Redwood Tree Gas Station.
36 • Color preference would be natural forest colors and/or earth tones, greens and reds found to
37 match/unify/ties in with the Redwood Tree Museum theme.
38
39 Chair Whetzel:
40 • Does not have a problem with the landscaping.
41 • Proposed project is a major improvement.
42 • Understands requiring trees for the project would not be feasible because the site will function as
43 car wash and this is a particularly busy type of business in terms of traffic and circulation. Trees
44 would interfere with effective onsite circulation.
45 • Is fine with 2% landscaping coverage.
46
47 Commissioner Christensen:
48 • Understands why the proposed landscaping coverage is 2% because it is a car wash and
49 customers have to be able to navigate and cars are moved around all of which must be done
50 safely.
51 • The site essentially consists of three parcels with one overall business i.e., the historic Redwood
52 Tree museum, gas station and car wash and while the car wash business site will be remodeled
53 the buildings on the other parcels are not proposed for beautification so from an aesthetic
54 standpoint this is a concern. The Planning Commission cannot make conditions of approval that
55 will require the applicant to make improvements to buildings/signage on the other parcels.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 9
1 Related to the issue of signage and beautification thereof would like to find a way to get all of the
2 signage for the three parcels to be similar. Also, would like to see some type of unification
3 between the buildings as it relates to color scheme/palate. Does not want the improvements
4 proposed for the car wash to be `glaringly' different from the historic Redwood Tree museum and
5 gas station building. As it is now, there is no `aesthetic flow' and this is more of a comment
6 because the Planning Commission cannot condition the project to make something happen that
7 involves the other buildings/signage on the site.
8 • Related to the issue of providing landscaping, noted there is an opportunity to increase the
9 landscaping on the other two parcels and would like to encourage this opportunity.
10
11 Commissioner Sanders:
12 • Asked about the possibility of adding a street tree at the MTA bus stop where the gas station is
13 located for shade purposes and noted an irrigation system is in place in this regard.
14
15 Commissioner Hilliker:
16 • Related to the issue of landscaping, understands the purpose/intent of the proposed project and
17 is of the opinion requiring additional landscaping coverage would be a problem based on the type
18 of businesses and activities that occur on the site.
19 • Referred to parking plan, asked about that portion of the plan designated as `truck parking' and
20 questioned what type of trucks would be parking in this location, i.e., tractor trailer, pick-up
21 parking.
22 • Asked about the `purple pipe' situation and if this was the type of project where the water can be
23 recycled?
24
25 There was Commission discussion regarding the landscaping and proposed trees for planting and
26 suitable locations.
27
28 Assistant Planner Johnson:
29 • Related to proposed truck parking, did not include this in the parking analysis because this was
30 not clearly defined. The truck parking is not part of the existing parking and showed the location
31 concerning the existing parking.
32 • Commission to condition the project related to the applicant's request for a reduction to the
33 required landscaping coverage of 20°/a of the gross area of the parcel and applicant's request for
34 a reduction in the parking from the required 34 parking space to 32 spaces.
35
36 Principal Planner Thompson:
37 • Related to the planting a new tree behind the MTA bus stop and would like Public Works to make
38 a determination about the feasibility.
39 • Has no knowledge whether or not the 'purple pipe' situation would work for the car wash
40 operation, but would work for the landscaping.
41
42 Commission consensus regarding parking:
43 • Fine with 32 parking spaces, as proposed.
44
45 Commission consensus regarding Landscaping:
46 • Public Works to determine in order to provide shade the applicant plant a new tree from the
47 approved street tree list on the project site behind the current Mendocino Transit stop on South
48 State Street, if feasible.
49 • Fine with 2% landscaping coverage for the project.
50 • No problem with the proposed parking.
51
52 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED: 7:16 p.m.
53
54 Ed Blair:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 10
1 • Confirmed the truck parking is actually designated for the parking of U-Haul vehicles and the sort
2 and would not be available for regular customer parking and should not be included in the parking
3 analysis. Understands truck parking is for rented vehicles, such as U-Haul vehicles.
4
5 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:19 p.m.
6
7 Staff/Commission changes/addition to Findings and Conditions of Approval:
8
9 Staff's revised Finding#13 to read: (See email dated 10/28/2015 from Assistant Planner Johnson)
10 The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
11 Section 15301, Existing Facilities, which allows exterior modifications, additions to existing
12 building and installation of replacement signage, Section 15304, Minor Alterations to Land, which
13 allows new landscaping, and Section 15311, Accessory Structures, which allows new signs
14 based on the following:
15 A. The Project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable
16 general plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and
17 regulations based on the analysis in the staff report.
18
19 B. Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police Department
20 and Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public
21 services.
22 C. The Project is a development site comprised primarily impervious surfaces (parking lot and
23 building). The site and surrounding area are not environmentally sensitive. The Project does
24 not include the removal of any trees. There are no wetlands, creeks, or water bodies on the
25 site.
26
27 D. The Project includes the planting of 17 new trees, and new landscape islands for a total of
28 2,488 sf. of landscaping.
29
30 Staff added new Finding#14 that reads: (See email dated 10/28/2015 from Assistant Planner Johnson)
31 Based on the email received from Robert Dickerson from the State Waterboard; received Tuesday
32 September 22, 2015; condition of approval # 11 has been added to address construction plan
33 requirements; and condition of approval # 12 requiring a groundwater management plan and
34 suggestions for elements of the plan.
35
36 Staff revised Conditions of Approval: (See email dated 10/28/2015 from Assistant Planner Johnson)
37
38 • From revised Condition of Approval#11 dated 10/28/2015:
39
40 Construction drawings should display the above and below grade locations of the borings, wells,
41 and remediation system.
42
43 • From revised Condition of Approval #12 dated 10/28/2015:
44
45 A soil and groundwater management plan shall be prepared to provide guidance in the event that
46 impacted soil or groundwater is encountered during future subsurface activities that include the
47 following:
48
49 a) Title
50 b) Table of Contents
51 c) Statement of Purpose
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 11
1 d) Who is Responsible for ensuring that the plan is implemented? (property owner and
2 permit applicant)
3 e) Who is responsible to supervise the work at the site and ensure implementation of the
4 plan, and what are the required qualifications for that responsibility?
5 f) Who is to be notified of the plan and its requirements prior to soil or groundwater
6 disturbance activities?
7 g) Problem Description: A general and concise statement about the nature and extent of all
8 potentially contaminated material remaining at the site. Identify COCs and potential
9 exposure pathways.
10 h) What actions are to be taken prior to disturbance activities in potentially contaminated
11 areas?
12 i) Plan Review by construction supervisor and site workers and assignment of duties:
13 DOCUMENT "STOP WORK AND IMPLEMENT SGMP" NOTIFICATION &
14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT;
15 j) Contingency Plan for HazWoper trained workers: statement of when and what must be
16 implemented for worker training and personal protection
17 k) What actions must be taken during grading, excavation activities?
18 I) Who is responsible to inspect, assess, and document the assessment of potential
19 contamination?
20 m) What soil screening methodologies should be employed?
21 n) What are the requirements for soil containment and characterization, handling and
22 disposal and reporting requirements?
23
24 This plan shall be prepared and submitted to the North Coast Regional Water Quality Board Prior
25 to the issuance of a Building Permit unless the board allows an alternative timeline.
26
27 Modification to Condition of Approval#4 related to parking exception:
28
29 • Applicant shall submit a Final Parking Plan to the Director of Planning for review and which must
30 be approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit for modification to the car wash structure.
31 The Final Parking Plan shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
32 a) Total Required Parking- 32 parking spaces; based on draft site development
33 permit finding#16 in attachment#1.
34 b) Directional striping for stacking for eight vehicles of the hand wash portion of the
35 facility.
36
37 Modification to Condition of Approval#5 related to landscaping exception:
38
39 • Applicant shall submit a Final Landscape Plan to the Director of Planning for review and which
40 must be approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit for modification to the car wash
41 structure. The Final Landscape Plan shall address the issues raised in the staff report and be
42 responsive to the issues raised by the Design Review Boards comments based on the
43 September 24, 2015 meeting and as approved by the Planning Commission at the October 28,
44 2015 meeting.
45
46 Modification to Condition of Approval#8 related to signage:
47 • Prior to the placemenUinstallation of any sign(s), the applicant shall make application for and
48 receive approval of a sign permit. Any signage shall be in substantial conformance with the
49 recommendations from October 28, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting. The use of natural
50 forest colors e.g. greens and reds, like those found in a redwood tree are required for the
51 proposed new signage.
52
53 New Condition of Approval from Planning Commission:
54
55 • I of Condition of Approval#22
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 12
1 If feasible, determined by the Public Works Department, in order to provide shade, the applicant
2 shall plant a new tree from the approved street tree list, on the project site behind the current
3 Mendocino Transit stop on South State Street.
4 M/S Sanders/Hilliker to approve Redwood Tree Car Wash Site Development Permit
5 File No.: 1257-SDP-PC with Findings in attachment 1 and Conditions of Approval in attachment 2 and
6 with the modification of Finding #13 and additional new Finding #14 and new/revised Conditions of
7 Approval, as discussed/noted above. Motion carried (5-0).
8
9 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
10 Principal Planner Thompson:
11 • Provided an update on upcoming projects.
12 • The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be December 9, 2015.
13 • The matter of local Food Vendors will be discussed at the City Council meeting on November 4,
14 2016.
15 • There will be a City Council/City Department Head Strategic Planning meeting on November 12,
16 2015.
17 • Provided an update on recent Zoning Administrator meetings.
18 • Chipotle has summited for a building permit.
19 • The PEP Housing project is progressing and 100% of the necessary funding for construction has
20 been received.
21 • The approved housing project near Rite Aid is progressing.
22 • Staff is receiving comments from the RFP for the Main Street project that was recently sent out to
23 interested parties.
24 • Has more information regarding the annual Planning conference at Sonoma State.
25 • Provided the Commissioners with an article regarding Planning Commissioners from citizen Pinky
26 Kushioner.
27
28 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
29
30 Commissioner Hilliker asked about the addition currently underway at the Held Poage Library/Museum.
31
32 Commissioner Watt advised of a Sustainable Groundwater Management Act workshop regarding the
33 Ukiah basin tomorrow evening from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. at the County Administrative Office Ag Building.
34
35 Chair Whetzel asked about what is done about approved projects that do not comply with what was
36 approved and cited the MacDonald's restaurant on Perkins Street that requested the use of two service
37 lanes but only uses one lane. As such, if one lane is only being used, Planning Commission could have
38 asked for more landscaping.
39
40 Principal Planner Thompson will look into the aforementioned matter.
41
42 12. ADJOURNMENT
43 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
44
45
46 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
47
48
49
50 ATTACHMENT 1
51
52
53 FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS
Page 13
1
2
3 A. Major Site Development Permit
4 B. Redwood Tree Car Wash Renovation
5 C. 859 North State Street
6 D. City File No. 1257
7
8
9 1. The fa�ade modification and small addition is an expansion of a commercial use consisting of a
10 carwash facility that is consistent with the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan, including
11 Land Use Element requirements for the siting of new structures;
12
13 2. The proposed Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance
14 as described in the staff report, including Table 2, and with the approval of the requested
15 modifications to the landscaping requirements, and parking requirement to allow 32 parking
16 spaces as opposed to the 34 parking spaces required.
17
18 3. Approval of the modifications to the landscaping requirements is based on the following:
19
20 A. 20 %Landscape Coverage:
21
22 i. Redwood Tree Car Wash APN #002-091-17 is currently developed with one
23 building (Redwood Tree Car Wash Office, Tire Service & Oil Change, and
24 Nelson Auto Glass) a large canopy from the former gas station, 1080 square
25 feet Car Wash Structure and pavement. There is minimal landscaping; and
26 few opportunities to add more (see attachment 7, Photos).
27
28 ii. However, as noted above, the Planning Commission has the authority to
29 modify the required elements of a landscaping plan "depending upon the
30 size, scale, intensity, and location of the development project." Based on the
31 size and scale of the project; existing constraints of the developed parcel ;
32 and consistency with other commercially developed parcels in the area that
33 do not meet the 20% coverage landscaping requirement, staff finds it is
34 reasonable to provide equity and allow the proposed landscaping. Staff has
35 included recommended findings supporting the reduction in landscaping
36 coverage.
37
38 B. Landscaping shall be proportional to building elevations:
39
40 i. The project would provide a total of 2,488 square feet of landscaping and 17
41 trees more than the site as currently developed with. The landscaping plan
42 includes interior trees, as well as shrubs, vines and groundcovers.
43
44 ii. As required, the Project including the landscaping plan was reviewed by the
45 Design Review Board (see above). The DRB approval includes
46 recommendations for the landscaping plan that is appropriate for the Project
47 and the planting conditions. The Planning Commission will review the
48 landscaping plan as part of its review of the Project and will determine as
49 part of its review if the Project should revise the existing landscaping plan.
50 Condition of Approval#5 has been added requiring a revised Landscape
51 Plan be submitted based on the approved landscaping requirements from the
52 Planning Commission.
53
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 14
1 C. All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health, and intensity so that a viable and
2 mature appearance can be attained within a reasonable short amount of time.
3
4 i. As required, the Project including the landscaping plan was reviewed by the
5 Design Review Board (see above). The DRB approval included
6 recommendations for the landscaping plan from board member Thayer that
7 is appropriate for the Project and the planting conditions.
8
9 4. Landscaping plans shall include an automatic irrigation plan and lighting plan. The applicant did
10 not submit an automatic irrigation plan; Condition of Approval # 6 has been added requiring the
11 applicant to include an irrigation plan that is consistent with the Cal Green Building Code; with the
12 applicants building application.
13
14 5. Based on the required parking 34 parking spaces; 3 bike parking spaces are required: Condition
15 of Approval # 7 has been added requiring plans submitted for building permit to include the
16 location of the required bike rack and is subject to staff review and approval.
17
18 6. The location, size, and intensity of the project will not create hazardous or inconvenient vehicular
19 or pedestrian traffic patterns because installation of the improved hand wash will eliminate
20 customers exiting they're vehicles at the start of the car washing process and walking across
21 traffic, which will improve vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns by creating a sense of order
22 and safety on the property;
23
24 7. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic
25 on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or
26 surrounding land uses since the parking lot and vehicle stacking improvements will increase the
27 ordered accessibility and interior circulation on the property;
28
29 8. Sufficient landscaped areas, as conditioned, will be reserved for purposes of separating or
30 screening the car wash from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and
31 screening large expanses of paved areas with the addition of 17 new trees, and new landscape
32 islands for a total of 2,488 sf. of landscaping
33
34 9. The fa�ade modification and small addition will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property,
35 or on the property in the neighborhood, or impair the value thereof since the addition is to the
36 backside of the structure and is relatively small in size at 220 square feet, it is a one story
37 structure that only reaches a height of 12'-2" above grade, and is not close enough to other
38 properties to restrict light and air or cast shadows;
39
40 10. The improvement of the commercial structure will not have a detrimental impact on the character
41 or value of an adjacent zoning district since it is a minor expansion of an existing use that
42 conforms to the City's development standards;
43
44 11. The project will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including trees, shrubs,
45 creeks, and the natural grade of the site since all natural features have already been removed
46 from the property and it is dominated by its hard paved surfaces and structures;
47
48 12. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the
49 modification to the fa�ade, parking facility, and landscaping, to avoid monotony and/or a box-like
50 uninteresting external appearance since the projects is designed to be consistent with the existing
51 structures;
52 13. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
53 Section 15301, Existing Facilities, which allows exterior modifications, additions to existing
54 building and installation of replacement signage, Section 15304, Minor Alterations to Land, which
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 15
1 allows new landscaping, and Section 15311, Accessory Structures, which allows new signs
2 based on the following:
3
4 E. The Project is consistent with the Commercial general plan designation and all applicable
5 general plan policies as well as with the Community Commercial zoning designation and
6 regulations based on the analysis in the staff report.
7 F. Based on review of the project by Public Works, the Electric Department, Police Department
8 and Fire Marshal, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public
9 services.
10 G. The Project is a development site comprised primarily impervious surfaces (parking lot and
11 building). The site and surrounding area are not environmentally sensitive. The Project does
12 not include the removal of any trees. There are no wetlands, creeks, or water bodies on the
13 site.
14 H. The Project includes the planting of 17 new trees, and new landscape islands for a total of
15 2,488 sf. of landscaping.
16
17 14. Based on the email received from Robert Dickerson from the State Waterboard; received
18 Tuesday September 22, 2015; condition of approval # 11 has been added to address
19 construction plan requirements; and condition of approval# 12 requiring a groundwater
20 management plan and suggestions for elements of the plan.
21
22 ATTACHMENT 2
23
24
25 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
26
27
28 Major Site Development Permit
29 Redwood Tree Car Wash Renovation
30 859 North State Street
31 City File No. 1257
32
33
34 1. All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the Planning
35 Commission, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches,
36 renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike.
37
38 2. The approved Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if
39 the approved project related to the Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the
40 stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the
41 effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the permit was granted has
42 ceased or has been suspended for twenty-four(24) consecutive months.
43
44 3. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Site Development Permit shall be granted only for the
45 specific purposes stated in the action approving the Permit and shall not be construed as
46 eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific
47 purposes.
48
49 4. Applicant shall submit a Final Parking Plan to the Director of Planning for review and which must
50 be approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit for modification to the car wash structure.
51 The Final Parking Plan shall, at a minimum, include the following information:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 16
1 c) Total Required Parking- 32 parking spaces; based on draft site development
2 permit finding#16 in attachment#1.
3 d) Directional striping for stacking for eight vehicles of the hand wash portion of the
4 facility.
5
6 5. Applicant shall submit a Final Landscape Plan to the Director of Planning for review and which
7 must be approved prior to issuance of the Building Permit for modification to the car wash
8 structure. The Final Landscape Plan shall address the issues raised in the staff report and be
9 responsive to the issues raised by the Design Review Boards comments based on the
10 September 24, 2015 meeting and as approved by the Planning Commission at the October 28,
11 2015 meeting.
12
13 6. The landscaping plans submitted with the building permit shall include an irrigation plan that is
14 consistent with the Cal Green Building Code.
15
16 7. Plans submitted for building permit shall include the location of the required bike rack and is
17 subject to staff review and approval. The bike rack shall be located as close as reasonable to the
18 front entrance to the retail store and shall be installed prior to occupancy.
19
20 8. Prior to the placemenUinstallation of any sign(s), the applicant shall make application for and
21 receive approval of a sign permit. Any signage shall be in substantial conformance with the
22 recommendations from October 28, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting. The use of natural
23 forest colors e.g. greens and reds, like those found in a redwood tree are required for the
24 proposed new signage.
25
26 9. On plans submitted for building permit, if required, these conditions of approval shall be included
27 as notes on the first sheet.
28
29 10. All proposed outdoor lighting must be downcast, fully shielded and International Dark Sky
30 Association approved or equivalent.
31
32 11. Construction drawings should display the above and below grade locations of the borings, wells,
33 and remediation system.
34
35 12. A soil and groundwater management plan shall be prepared to provide guidance in the event that
36 impacted soil or groundwater is encountered during future subsurface activities that includes the
37 following:
38
39 0) Title
40 p) Table of Contents
41 q) Statement of Purpose
42 r) Who is Responsible for ensuring that the plan is implemented? (property owner and
43 permit applicant)
44 s) Who is responsible to supervise the work at the site and ensure implementation of the
45 plan, and what are the required qualifications for that responsibility?
46 t) Who is to be notified of the plan and its requirements prior to soil or groundwater
47 disturbance activities?
48 u) Problem Description: A general and concise statement about the nature and extent of all
49 potentially contaminated material remaining at the site. Identify COCs and potential
50 exposure pathways.
51 v) What actions are to be taken prior to disturbance activities in potentially contaminated
52 areas?
53 w) Plan Review by construction supervisor and site workers and assignment of duties:
54 DOCUMENT "STOP WORK AND IMPLEMENT SGMP" NOTIFICATION &
55 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT;
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 17
1 x) Contingency Plan for HazWoper trained workers: statement of when and what must be
2 implemented for worker training and personal protection
3 y) What actions must be taken during grading, excavation activities?
4 z) Who is responsible to inspect, assess, and document the assessment of potential
5 contamination?
6 aa) What soil screening methodologies should be employed?
7 bb) What are the requirements for soil containment and characterization, handling and
8 disposal and reporting requirements?
9
10 This plan shall be prepared and submitted to the North Coast Regional Water Quality Board Prior
11 to the issuance of a Building Permit unless the board allows an alternative timeline.
12
13
14 Standard Citv Conditions of Approval
15
16 13. Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction
17 now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of
18 Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the
19 Zoning Administrator.
20
21 14. In addition to any particular condition imposed, any construction shall comply with all building,
22 fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the
23 time the Building Permit is approved and issued.
24
25 15. All work within the City right-of-way shall be performed by a properly licensed Contractor with a
26 current City of Ukiah Business License. Contractor must submit copies of proper insurance
27 coverage (Public Liability, $1,000,000; Property Damage, $1,000,000) and current Workman's
28 Compensation Certificate.
29
30 16. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department is required to perform all work with
31 the street right-of-way.
32
33 17. All conditions that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior to release
34 of final building inspection and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the primary building on
35 the site.
36
37 18. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use,
38 including but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been
39 applied for and issued/finaled.
40
41 19. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
42 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
43
44 20. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
45 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
46
47 21. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
48 to building permit final.
49
50 22. All required landscaping shall be properly maintained to insure the long-term health and vitality of
51 the plants, shrubs and trees. Proper maintenance means, but is not limited to the following:
52
53 A. Regular slow, deep watering when feasible. The amount of water used shall fluctuate
54 according to the season, i. e., more water in summer, less in the winter.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 18
1 B. Additional watering shall occur during long periods of severe heat and drying winds, and
2 reduced watering shall be used during extended periods of cool rainy weather.
3 C. Fertilizer shall only being used on trees during planting. Shrubs may receive periodic
4 fertilizer according to the recommendations of a landscaping professional.
5 D. Weed killers shall not be used on or near trees.
6 E. The tree ties and stakes shall be checked every six months to ensure they do not
7 constrict the trunks and damage the trees.
8 F. Tree ties and stakes shall be removed after 1 to 3 years to ensure they do not damage
9 the trunk of the tree and its overall growth.
10 G. Any tree that dies or is unhealthy due to pests, disease or other factors, including
11 vandalism, shall be replaced with the same or similar tree species, or an alternative
12 species approved by the department of Planning and Community Development.
13 H. All trees shall be properly pruned as appropriate. No topping cuts shall be made. All
14 pruning shall follow standard industry methods and techniques to ensure the health and
15 vitality of the tree.
16
17 Planning Commission
18 I. If feasible, determined by the Public Works Department, in order to provide shade, the
19 applicant shall plant a new tree from the approved street tree list, on the project site
20 behind the current Mendocino Transit stop on South State Street.
21
22
23 23. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
24 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
25 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
26 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
27 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
28
29 24. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
30 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
31 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
32 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
33 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
34 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
35 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
36 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
37 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
38 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
39 remain in full force and effect.
40 From the Electrical Department(Jimmv Lozano 467-5774)
41
42 The COU Electric Department will require a utility easement for any underground distribution extended
43 into the parcel beyond the existing electric easements. Easements must be adjusted and officially
44 recorded with the county. The preliminary primary 12kv underground feed will extend into the parcel from
45 an existing transformer (CU# 1698), which is located near the proposed southeastern corner of the
46 property site. The new transformer/s will most likely be located in a proposed landscape area that must
47 allow for minimum clearances around the pad mount equipment per G.O. 128 (Rule 34.2 C
48 Transformers). The easement would cover the entire length of our primary/secondary conductors, to
49 include the new transformer/s equipment and pads that will be located on the parcel.
50
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 19
1 The applicant shall provide and install at no cost to the City and in accordance with City standards and
2 specifications, all conduits, equipment pads, junction boxes, vaults, street lights and subsurface housings
3 required for power distribution within the development and all trenching, backfill, resurfacing, equipment
4 pads and landscaping. Prior to backfilling or pouring of concrete for equipment, or subsurface equipment,
5 facilities must be inspected by City Electric Department representatives. Based on final inspection of the
6 work performed and upon acceptance by the City, the applicant will transfer ownership of such facilities to
7 the City.
8
9 The Project scope of work is subject to change as excavation proceeds. There will most likely be design
10 elements added or deleted to the scope of work as the project moves forward and that is to be expected
11 with a project of this size. Should the construction and/or project requirements or scope of work change in
12 the future, COUEUD will make every effort to accommodate the changes and modify the proposed
13 primary 12kv feed. The proposed locations for the new 12kv primary feed and the new transformer/s will
14 need to be worked out with the applicant as soon as reasonably possible or practical. The placement of
15 the new pad mount transformer/s on the parcel site could be worked out prior to the building permit being
16 issued, in order to avoid potential delays on the project. Applicant is responsible for repair and/or
17 replacement of concrete & asphalt surfaces around all excavation sites as needed.
18
19 The City shall provide an estimate of the costs which the project applicant and/or designated contractor
20 shall deposit with the City, prior to issuance of permit. After the project is complete, the City shall provide
21 the applicant with an invoice of the final costs. The City shall refund to the applicant any portion of the
22 deposit that exceeds the estimate. If the actual costs exceed the estimate, the applicant shall pay the City
23 the portion of the actual costs that exceed the estimate within thirty (30) days after it receives an invoice
24 from the City.
25
26 From the Public Works Department (Ben Kaqevama 467-5774)
27
28 1. Prior to construction of site improvements, a final grading, drainage, landscaping, and erosion
29 and sediment control plan, prepared by a Civil Engineer, shall be submitted for review and
30 approval by the Department of Public Works.
31
32 2. If the building permit value is equal to or greater than one-third of the value of the existing
33 structure, the construction, repair or upgrade of concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk to meet ADA
34 standards, and addition of street trees, along the subject property street frontage, may be
35 required, pursuant to Section 9181 of the Ukiah City Code.
36
37 3. All work within the public right-of-way shall be performed by a licensed and properly insured
38 contractor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within this area or
39 otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3% of estimated
40 construction costs.
41
42 4. If a building permit value of work exceeds $116, 075 (amount adjusted annually), or the proposed
43 improvements create the net addition of two or more plumbing fixture units to a building, the
44 existing sanitary sewer lateral shall be tested in accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No.
45 1105, and repaired or replaced if required.
46
47 5. If additional plumbing fixtures are proposed, City of Ukiah sewer connection fees shall apply, and
48 shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance. For wash-water discharge into the sewer
49 system, an oil/water separator will be required.
50
51 6. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved with asphaltic concrete, concrete, or other
52 alternative surfacing, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
53
54 7. Storm drain inlet filters shall be installed and maintained in all on-site storm drain inlets within
55 paved areas.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 20
1
2 8. The applicant has submitted additional information (memo dated 9/11/15 from Tunnel Vision)
3 indicating the proposed project is estimated to increase water usage 20%, from 177 to 212 units
4 per month. Based on the additional 35 units per month sewer discharge, and assuming sewer
5 strength characteristics typical of automatic car washes equipped with an oil/water separator or
6 clarifier, a sewer connection fee of $19,312 has been determined for the project, and shall be
7 paid at the time of building permit issuance.
8
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION October 28, 2015
Page 21