HomeMy WebLinkAbout02242016 - packet CITY OF UKIAH
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
February 24, 2016
6:00 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
UKIAH CIVIC CENTER, 300 SEMINARY AVENUE
2. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS WATT, HILLIKER,
CHRISTENSEN, SANDERS, CHAIR WHETZEL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes from the January 13, 2016 and January 27, 2016 meetings will be
included for review and approval at the February 24, 2016 meeting.
5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The Planning Commission welcomes input from the audience. In order for
everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per
person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act
regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments.
6. APPEAL PROCESS (Not Applicable)
All determinations of the Planning Commission regarding major discretionary
planning permits are final unless a written appeal, stating the reasons for the
appeal, is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision
was made. An interested party may appeal only if he or she appeared and
stated his or her position during the hearing on the decision from which the
appeal is taken.
7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE
9. PUBLIC WORKSHOP
Public Review and Input on the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodations.Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a
meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend.The City complies with
ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call (707)
463-6752 or(707)463-6207 to arrange accommodations.
12. AD]OURNMENT
Americans with Disabilities Act Accommodations.Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a
meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend.The City complies with
ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Please call (707)
463-6752 or(707)463-6207 to arrange accommodations.
1 Draft UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 January 13, 2016
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair
7 Christopher Watt
8 Laura Christensen
9 Mark Hilliker
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 December 09, 2015 meeting are included for
26 review and approval.
27
28 M/S Sanders/Watt to approve December 09, 2015 minutes, as submitted. Motion carried (4-0) with
29 Commissioner Christensen abstaining.
30
31 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
32
33 6. APPEAL PROCESS
34
35 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
36
37 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE-Confirmed by Staff.
38
39 9. PUBLIC HEARING
40 9A. Ukiah Forest Club Major Use Permit for Live Music, 239 North State (File No.: 1414—UP-PC)
41 An application has been received from Frank Kibbish on behalf of the Ukiah Forest Club, 239
42 North State Street for Planning Commission approval to allow live inside entertainment and
43 special events at 239 North State Street, APN 002-227-12.
44
45 Assistant Planner Johnson:
46 • Gave a PowerPoint and project presentation as provided for on pages 1 through 8 of the staff
47 and corresponding attachments 1 through 5.
48 • Approval of the proposed use permit project would allow live inside entertainment in the form of:
49 • 1) various nights of the week; 2) Hours of 8:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.; 3) Amplified music such as a
50 band or disc jockey; 4)comedy shows; open microphone; 5) Karaoke.
51 • The proposed project is located in the General Plan land use designation `Commercial' and the
52 property is located in the Downtown Zoning Code designation and zoned Downtown Core (DC)
53 that requires approval of a major Use Permit for live entertainment past 9:00 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 1
1 • The project site is developed with a 2,500 sq. ft. commercial building on a 2,578 sq. ft. parcel.
2 The parking lot located to the rear of the building with existing perimeter trees is not part of the
3 site and/or project.
4 • The proposed project is located in Airport Compatibility Zone B-2 (Extended/Approach
5 Departure) Infill where low intensity retail and office are normally acceptable. The maximum
6 density is 90 people for non-residential uses in the B-2 Infill area. The City of Ukiah Fire Marshal
7 has indicated the maximum occupancy rate for a 2,500 sq. ft. night club is approximately 95
8 people. Based on staff's empirical observations, the number of people at the Forest Club on a
9 typical Friday and Saturday night would be similar to the 85 persons the applicant predicts will
10 attend the proposed Live Entertainment events. This number plus the two employees for a
11 maximum shift does not exceed the maximum allowed occupancy rate of 95 people. The Forest
12 Club has been operating at this level of intensity for over 50 years at the subject location and
13 well before the Ukiah Airport Master Plan as it relates to density was adopted. The expected
14 maximum number of people on the site during a music event exceeds the recently adopted
15 airport density standard such that the use has been determined and is considered legal non-
16 conforming to the density standard for the B-2 Infill Airport Compatibility Zone.
17 • The project has no on-site parking accommodations and is located in the Downtown Parking
18 Improvement District such that it is exempt from the parking requirements of the Downtown
19 Zoning Code.
20 • Due to the building and parcel size and corresponding constraints leaves no opportunity for new
21 landscaping such that the project would not comply with the City 20% landscape coverage
22 requirement where an exception to the requirement is requested. The City approved the Ukiah
23 Forest Club prior to adoption of the 20% landscaping lot coverage standard. Staff supports a
24 reduction to the landscaping coverage as addressed in Finding 5.
25 • The applicant submitted a Security Management Plan date stamped December 01, 2015 that
26 was reviewed and approved with comments by the City Police and Fire Department and
27 addresses the issues of safety/security, noise, loitering, litter, lighting, alcohol consumption and
28 education/training as provided for in attachment 3.
29 • One public comment was received by staff today in support of the proposed project and is
30 included in the minutes as attachment 1.
31 • Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the proposed project based on the draft
32 Findings in attachment 1 and subject to the draft Conditions of Approval in attachment 2 that
33 address the extended hours of live entertainment occurring past 9:00 p.m., the exception to the
34 landscaping coverage requirement, and Security Management Plan.
35
36 Commissioner Sanders:
37 • Asked about staff's analysis regarding live entertainment in the DZC.
38 • Referenced attachment 4 concerning condition #3 from the Ukiah Police Department that states,
39 'As a condition of any use permit granted; If the live entertainment or cover charge events cause
40 the need for a Police Response more than two times in a calendar year, the permit holder will be
41 required to thereafter submit a security plan to the Ukiah Police Department for approval a
42 minimum of 45 days prior to any future events. The plan will articulate in detail the event planned
43 and clear describe how security will be staffed to minimize the need for police responses. In such
44 cases, approval or denial will be provided to the applicant no less than 30 days prior to the
45 proposed evenY and asked how the `two calls per year' policy came into existence/play. Is
46 concerned the Security Plan and corresponding conditions of approval are fair/reasonable and
47 consistent with other approved Live Entertainment use permits in the community. Questioned if
48 the two per year service calls apply to other businesses?
49 • Asked about the origin/status of the City Building Code violation currently in effect for the existing
50 building that would have to be corrected before the proposed use permit is valid.
51
52 Assistant Planner Johnson:
53 • The staff analysis concerning live entertainment was based on DZC requirements since the Ukiah
54 Forest Club is located in the DC zone and referenced the fundamental issues related to the live
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 2
1 entertainment use that are specially addressed in the Security Management Plan that had to be
2 appropriately addressed for consistency with the required findings for the DZC.
3 • Referred to draft Condition of Approval 5 that states, `This Use Permit shall be reviewed within 12
4 months of issuance by the Planning Director to determine compliance with the conditions of
5 approval. The number of Police Response in a calendar year that were a direct result of the
6 establishmenYs failure to follow their approved management plan as determined, after a review,
7 by the Planning Director and the Police Department regarding the amount of Police staff time
8 associated with the Use Permit, and complaints received as a result of the live music and special
9 events. If the Planning Director determines the use is not in compliance with the conditions of
10 approval and/or that the use requires additional review, the Use Permit shall be scheduled for
11 review by the Planning Commission. Review of the Use Permit by Planning Commission shall
12 include a public notice and the applicant is responsible for paying the costs associated with
13 Planning Commission review of the Use Permit (cost recovery). If complaints associated with the
14 approved live music and special events are received during the first 12 months, this Use Permit
15 shall be reviewed annually by the Planning Director as described above. The Planning Director
16 shall determine if Planning Commission review of the Use Permit is required' and noted this
17 condition more fully explains the need for the Ukiah Forest Club to follow their
18 Management/Security Plan (attachment 3) that was agreed upon by the applicant and Police
19 Department with regard to safety/security, noise, loitering, litter, lighting, alcohol consumption and
20 education/training so service calls to the police department do not increase that could trigger
21 review of the Use Permit for compliance with the project conditions of approval that includes
22 conditions of approval from the Police Department. If the Security Plan is not being followed and
23 a compliant is made that would count as a `strike' against the Use Permit that if not corrected
24 could lead to review of the permit by the Planning Director. Condition of Approval 5 is in place to
25 protect the Forest Club from a possible disgruntled person making an erroneous/invalid
26 complaint. The complaint must be valid and have substance. The intent was to make certain the
27 Security Plan and corresponding policies/rules regarding service calls to the Police Department
28 and use permit conditions of approval for the live entertainment operation were fairly/accurately
29 assessed/addressed to avoid potential violations thereof.
30 • Confirmed `the two calls per year' policy was also applied to the PUB Live Entertainment Use
31 Permit.
32 • Would have to defer the type of building code violation on file with the City Building Department to
33 the applicant.
34
35 Commissioner Watt:
36 • Questioned how we got to the point where a business that has been in operation for more than 50
37 years and had live music is required to get a use permit. There should be some policy in place
38 that allows a business that has been in operation for a substantial period time to have a `vested
39 right' for such things as live entertainment without having to get a use permit. In other words, is
40 there some `vesting' that that exempts such business from having to comply with newly adopted
41 zoning codes regulations and/or having to go through the use permit process.
42 • Requested clarification if a business has been conducting a certain activity and a new zoning
43 code goes into effect that requires a use permit for that activity does this automatically apply to
44 the business even though the business was conducting that particular activity long before the
45 zoning code was adopted?
46 • Reference is given in the staff report to loitering in the parking lot and noted the project does not
47 have a parking lot. There are outside areas and a back patio.
48
49 Principal Planner Thompson:
50 • Is not familiar with allowing for a 'vesting right.'
51 • Is of the opinion/has knowledge a compliant likely triggered the need to get use permit approval
52 to allow live music in bar/restaurant establishments. Has knowledge the PUB Bar and Restaurant
53 experienced a variety of complaints over time concerning the bar use such that the number of
54 complaints and/or police service calls triggered the need to go through the use permit process to
55 allow for live entertainment.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 3
1 • It is likely a business conducting a certain activity long before the zoning code was adopted would
2 not require a use permit but then again if complaints are made about a particular establishment
3 with regard to a use, it is likely a use permit would be required for a new use. Again, if a business
4 becomes an issue with the neighborhood then a proposed new use would have to be looked at to
5 make sure this business is operating up to code like everyone else.
6
7 Assistant Planner Johnson:
8 • The PUB Bar was required to get use permit approval for live entertainment that was essentially
9 the result of public complaints.
10 • Confirmed there is no parking lot included in the proposed project.
11
12 Commissioner Hilliker:
13 • Asked about the type of building code violation.
14
15 Chair Whetzel:
16 • Served on the Planning Commission when the DZC was being reviewed for eventual adoption by
17 City Council. Many hours were spent formulating the use table that does address live
18 entertainment in the three DZC zoning designations in the Downtown. It is his understanding live
19 music was allowed in the Downtown area by right and without a use permit. Questioned why the
20 Commission is reviewing a use permit application to allow live music in the Downtown core.
21 • The intent of the DZC was to more or less streamline projects such as Live Music provided the
22 appropriate criteria is met without requiring applicants to go through the lengthy discretionary
23 review process.
24 • Does not make sense to require the Planning Commission approve a major use permit to allow
25 live entertainment in the Downtown where unlike the PUB there is no residential use in the area.
26 Would be willing to approve the proposed project `right now.'
27
28 Assistant Planner Johnson:
29 • The DZC requires approval of a use permit to allow live entertainment past 9:00 p.m. in the
30 Downtown core.
31 • Related to the DZC live entertainment is considered an accessory use to the `Bar, Cocktail
32 Lounge' use and section 9224.6 states, `Live entertainment with four or fewer acoustical
33 performers is allowed as an accessory use when it is clearly incidental to the primary use of the
34 building or site and will not negatively impact surrounding businesses and properties and hours
35 of perFormance do not extend past 9:00 p.m.'
36 • The DZC says related to extended hours that live entertainment may be authorized past the
37 hours of 9:00 p.m. with Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission approval. It was the
38 Planning Director's decision to have the Planning Commission review the proposed live
39 entertainment project rather than the Zoning Administrator.
40
41 Principal Planner Thompson:
42 • Confirmed the Zoning Administrator would have reviewed the project if the Planning Commission
43 did not where the hearing would have been publically noticed.
44 • It is likely the reason the Planning Commission is reviewing the use permit application for the
45 Forest Club is because the PUB required approval of a use permit for live entertainment where
46 the PUB had various types of complaints over time that required police service calls. Given the
47 problems generated from the PUB and in all fairness to the neighborhood of the Forest Club with
48 regard potential significant impacts Planning Commission review of a Security Plan and Use
49 Permit to allow live entertainment was of importance to staff.
50
51 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:30 p.m.
52
53 Frank Kibbish, Applicant:
54 • Does not own the building. The building owner would have to take care of any building `red tags.'
55 • The impending building code violation has not affected his bar operation.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 4
1 • Addressed the existing fence and security gate located to the rear of the property and how this
2 works. The Police Department likes that the fence is over 12 feet in height and the back area is
3 fenced-off from a safety and security issue standpoint.
4 • Addressed the location of the entrances and advised security persons are assigned to these
5 entrances to make certain underage and/or other undesirable persons cannot patron the
6 establishment.
7 • Related to police service calls, does not recall many call-outs in three years, if any, since he has
8 owned the business. The Forest Club does not experience any issues under the current
9 management.
10
11 Commissioner Watt:
12 • The use permit cannot take effect until the building code violation issue is cleared-up/resolved.
13
14 Commissioner Hilliker:
15 • Inquired about the rear exit and how this functions.
16 • Inquired about the patio area and if this was intended for people using the facility.
17 • Inquired about the industrial locked gate located in the rear of the building.
18 • Asked about occupancy rate of 95 people and whether this should be that high.
19
20 Commissioner Sanders:
21 • Is hoping the Building Official would not require work on the fence, if this is what the code
22 violation is. Finds the fencing to be `attractive' and a good height. Also likes the Redwood trees
23 that border the fence line. As such, is a perfect reason the Planning Commission should not add
24 any more landscaping requirements for the proposed project.
25 • It appears the gate is safe and hopes this is not the violation. It would be nice to have more clarity
26 in this regard.
27
28 Commissioner Christensen:
29 • Requested clarification if the building is 2,500 sq. ft. and the parcel is 2,578 sq. ft. the gate is not
30 on the property.
31 • Asked for clarification if the code violation pertains to the gate.
32
33 Frank Kibbish:
34 • Understands the building code violation must be cleared.
35 • Confirmed the function of the patio area.
36 • The alarmed gate remains locked at all times from the outside and the fence is attached. There
37 is a `panic bar' on the gate from the inside of the property for safety purposes and talked about
38 how the panic bar works and the type. The Fire Department has reviewed and approved the
39 security gate and its function.
40 • Technically the gate is not associated with the Forest Club. The owner of the Forest Club also
41 owns the parking lot where the gate is located. The Forest Club rents the parking lot that is used
42 as the patio area. The intent of the patio area is to cut down on the amount of loitering in the
43 front of the building. Confirmed the parking lot is a separate lot.
44 • Is unsure what the code violation pertains to. The building is more than 100 years old so there
45 are likely building code violations. Noted it may be no building permit was issued for the office
46 space constructed inside the building above the bar by the former bar owner that would have to
47 be torn down/ inspected and this would mean removal of sheetrock and such that should not be
48 too costly to do.
49 • The occupancy rate of 95 persons was formulated by the Fire Marshal. Wants the occupancy
50 rate to be lower just to be safe and is fine with the occupancy rate of 85 persons.
51 • The building could actually withstand an occupancy rate of 100 persons, but for safety reasons
52 should be lower.
53
54 Assistant Planner Johnson:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 5
1 • Estimated the density to 87 persons, i.e., 2 employees on the maximum shift plus 85 customers
2 at the Ukiah Forest Club.
3 • The Fire Marshal was to again review maximum density allowed for the building and inform staff.
4 • Consulted with the Building Official concerning density and compliance with the B2 Airport
5 Compatibility Zone and asked what the potential occupancy rate should be based on the building
6 square footage. The Building Official calculated a rough estimated density of 100 to 150 persons
7 based on the square footage and other consideration such as chairs, pool tables, etc. The
8 occupancy rate of 95 persons is far below what the Building Official estimated.
9
10 Commissioner Hilliker:
11 • Would not support a density rate of 150 persons or even a density of 100 persons.
12 • Having been in the building when it was well occupied by patrons finds that will all the furniture,
13 pool tables to be very crowded. While it may not be a code violation, is of the opinion it would be
14 unsafe to have more than 95 persons in the building at one time, especially with the consumption
15 of alcohol and all the activities going on.
16
17 Frank Kibbish:
18 • If the bar becomes crowded the pool tables are moved to the corner of the building in a place that
19 is almost always unoccupied freeing up space upfront for safety reasons and this makes it less
20 crowded.
21
22 Commissioner Hilliker:
23 • Even with the pool tables moved to the corner that allows for more space upfront, there still is not
24 sufficient floor space when the building is crowded.
25
26 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:30 p.m.
27
28 Commissioner Hilliker:
29 • Having worked security in nightclubs asked how security is handled at the Ukiah Forest Club.
30 • Is pleased with how the Forest Club is currently managed/operated.
31
32 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED 6:31 p.m.
33
34 Frank Kibbish:
35 • Staff handles security and explained the protocol/procedures.
36 • Is experienced in managing nightclubs and understands how one should be effectively operated,
37 particularly with regard to addressing security.
38
39 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:37 p.m.
40
41 Associate Planner Johnson:
42 • Related to Commission concern regarding maximum occupancy and project approval, Condition
43 of Approval #1 requires that live entertainment and special events fully comply with the project
44 description and Security Management Plan submitted by the applicant and date stamped
45 December 1, 2015 by the Planning Department as provided for in attachment 3. If the
46 Commission still has further concerns about density a condition stating what the maximum
47 occupancy rate can be crafted.
48
49 Chair Whetzel:
50 • The discussion has been about the estimated density rate being established between 85 and 95
51 persons.
52
53 Commissioner Watt:
54 • Requested clarification the proposed use permit is for live entertainment past 9:00 p.m. where live
55 entertainment is allowed prior to 8:00 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 6
1
2 Associate Planner Johnson:
3 • While the staff analysis talks about estimated density as provided for on page 3 of the staff report,
4 no condition of approval has been formulated in this regard.
5 • Confirmed the intent of the project use permit is to allow live entertainment at 239 N. State Street
6 after 9:00 p.m. and the establishment of a maximum occupancy rate is required for the use
7 permit.
8
9 Commissioner Sanders:
10 • Requested clarification the Fire Marshal sets the occupancy rate.
11 • Condition of Approval #16 from the Fire Marshal states, `Prior to opening for live music I will
12 require a Fire and Life Safety Inspection and an occupancy check (how many people can safely
13 occupy the business). Both of these items I can do now or any time prior,' and questioned why
14 the Fire Marshal did not state what the maximum occupancy rate should be in the Condition of
15 Approval.
16
17 Commissioner Hilliker:
18 • Occupancy rate is addressed/provided for in the City Fire Code and is based on a number of
19 factors some of which include building square footage, floor plan, type of operation occurring in
20 the building, etc.
21
22 There was Commission discussion about what the maximum occupancy rate should be.
23
24 Commission consensus:
25 • The use permit for live entertainment shall have maximum occupancy rate of 92 persons for live
26 events after 9:00 p.m.
27 • Related to the issue of the applicant seeking relief from the landscaping requirements supports
28 Finding #5 that states, `The Planning Commission has the authority to modify the required
29 elements of a landscaping plan `depending upon the size, scale, intensity, and location of the
30 development project.' The reduction of landscaping is reasonable and appropriate for the
31 following reasons: The existing property is developed with a 2,500 square feet commercial
32 building and the total parcel size is 2,578, which leaves very little opportunity for new
33 landscaping.'
34
35 Associate Planner Johnson:
36 • Recommends new condition of approval regarding maximum density be numbered 2F.
37
38 M/S Watt/Hilliker to approve Ukiah Forest Club Major Use Permit for Live Music, File No.: 1414-UP-PC
39 based on Findings in attachment 1 and subject to Conditions of Approval in attachment 2 with new
40 condition of approval establishing the maximum occupancy rate, as discussed above. Motion carried
41 (5-0).
42
43 Final Use Permit Findings
44 LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPECIAL EVENTS
45 AT 239 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-227-12
46 FILE NO: MUNIS 1414
47
48 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
49 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
50
51 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
52 Plan and Zoning Code as described in the staff report and Table 2.
53
54 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to public health, safety and general
55 welfare based on the following:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 7
1
2 A. Through the use permit, the operational characteristics are regulated and conditions of
3 approval have been added to reduce any adverse impacts as discussed above.
4 Therefore, the project would not be detrimental to the surrounding uses.
5 B. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official,
6 and Public Works and any review comments from these departments have been included
7 as conditions of approval.
8 C. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws.
9
10 3. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
11 Act(CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 Class 3, conversion of small structures and Section 15301
12 Class 1, Existing Facilities based on the following:
13
14 A. The proposed project will be ancillary to an existing business and does not involve
15 hazardous materials;
16 B. The location is not environmentally sensitive and no drainage courses or bodies of water
17 (such as creeks or streams).
18 C. The site is developed with an existing building, utilities and services are available at the
19 site and no expansion of the existing building footprint is proposed as part of the project.
20
21 4. The proposed project is located in the Downtown Parking Improvement District therefore is
22 exempt from parking requirements prescribed in section 9228.2 of the Downtown Zoning Code.
23
24 5. The Planning Commission has the authority to modify the required elements of a landscaping
25 plan "depending upon the size, scale, intensity, and location of the development project." The
26 reduction of landscaping is reasonable and appropriate for the following reasons:
27
28 A. The existing property is developed with a 2, 500 square feet commercial building and the
29 total parcel size is 2,578; which leaves very little opportunity for new landscaping.
30
31 Notice of the proposed project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
32 Ordinance:
33
34 a) posted in three places on the project site on December 29, 2015;
35 b) mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on January 04, 2016; and
36 c) published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on January 03, 2016.
37
38 Final Use Permit Conditions of Approval
39 LIVE ENTERTAINMENT AND SPECIAL EVENTS
40 AT 239 NORTH STATE STREET, APN 002-227-12
41 FILE NO: MUNIS 1414
42
43 1. Approval is granted to allow live entertainment and special events as described in the project
44 description submitted to the Planning and Community Development Department and date
45 stamped December 01, 2015 and the Security Management Plan date stamped December 01,
46 2015 except as modified by the following conditions of approval.
47
48 2. Live Entertainment is allowed subject to the following:
49
50 A. Live entertainment is allowed in the form of a live band and/or disc jockey,
51 Comedy Show, Open Microphone, and/or Karaoke.
52
53 B. Live entertainment may be amplified or non-amplified.
54
55 C. Live entertainment is allowed on various nights of the week.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 8
1
2 D. Within the Ukiah Forest Club, the hours for live entertainment are limited to 8:00 p.m. to
3 1:00 p.m. in order to reduce noise when live entertainment is occurring within the Ukiah
4 Forest Club, exterior doors shall remain closed.
5
6 E. No outdoor amplified live entertainment is allowed.
7 F. Maximum Occupancy of 92 people for live events after 9:00 p.m.
8
9 3. All employees of the Ukiah Forest Club shall be given a copy of the approved Security
10 Management Plan and these conditions of approval.
11
12 4. At least one owner of the Ukiah Forest CLub shall be onsite during all live entertainment events.
13
14 5. This Use Permit shall be reviewed within 12 months of issuance by the Planning Director to
15 determine compliance with the conditions of approval. The number of Police Response in a
16 calendar year that were a direct result of the establishmenYs failure to follow their approved
17 management plan as determined, after a review, by the Planning Director and the Police
18 Department regarding the amount of Police staff time associated with the Use Permit, and
19 complaints received as a result of the live music and special events. If the Planning Director
20 determines the use is not in compliance with the conditions of approval and/or that the use
21 requires additional review, the Use Permit shall be scheduled for review by the Planning
22 Commission. Review of the Use Permit by Planning Commission shall include a public notice and
23 the applicant is responsible for paying the costs associated with Planning Commission review of
24 the Use Permit (cost recovery). If complaints associated with the approved live music and special
25 events are received during the first 12 months, this Use Permit shall be reviewed annually by the
26 Planning Director as described above. The Planning Director shall determine if Planning
27 Commission review of the Use Permit is required.
28
29 6. In order to reduce noise and loitering within the parking lot, at the close of business each night
30 the Ukiah Forest Club owners/staff shall ensure that their patrons have left the site by 2:00 a.m.
31 each night.
32
33 7. Any modifications to the ABC license for the premises may require an amendment to this Use
34 Permit or a new Use Permit to allow an increase of the hours during which alcohol is served.
35
36 8. All provisions of the Security Management Plan date stamped December 01, 2015 to Operate the
37 Ukiah Forest Club shall be adhered to at all times.
38
39 9. Activities approved as part of this Use Permit are subject to the requirements of Ukiah City Code
40 Division 7, Chapter 1, Article 6 (Noise Ordinance).
41
42 10. The applicant agrees to post signs in a location that is visible to people entering the Ukiah Forest
43 Club telling patrons to respect the peace of residential neighborhoods and to please avoid
44 parking in the residential neighborhood where possible.
45
46 From the Police Department(Sean Kaeser)
47
48 11. As a condition of any use permit granted the applicant must obtain and maintain the proper
49 modifications and conditions to their Alcohol License as required by the California Department of
50 Alcohol Beverage Control.
51
52 12. As a condition of any use permit granted the applicant have a written Security Plan in place that
53 meets the approval of the Ukiah Police Department.
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 9
1 13. As a condition of any use permit granted; If the live entertainment or cover charge events cause
2 the need for a Police Response more than two (2) times in a calendar year, the permit holder will
3 be required to thereafter submit a security plan to the Ukiah Police Department for approval a
4 minimum of 45 days prior to any future events. The plan will articulate in detail the event planned
5 and clearly describe how security will be staffed to minimize the need for police responses. In
6 such cases, approval or denial will be provided to the applicant no less than 30 days prior to the
7 proposed event.
8
9 14. As a condition of any use permit granted the facility will be open to inspection during live
10 entertainment and coverage events and the Ukiah Police Department will not be denied access.
11
12 15. As a condition of any user permit granted; In the event of a change of ownership or management
13 of the facility associated with the live entertainment, the City shall be notified on the change in
14 ownership/management. The new owner/manager shall meet with the Planning Department and
15 Police Department to review this Use Permit and Security Plan. The new owner/manager shall
16 indicate in writing if any modifications to the uses allowed by this Use Permit are proposed and
17 shall identify the proposed modifications. Any proposed modifications shall be reviewed by the
18 Planning Department and Police Department. The Planning Director shall determine if the
19 proposed modifications are consistent with this Use Permit or require approval of an amendment
20 to this Use Permit and shall determine if the amendment is minor (Zoning Administrator) or major
21 (Planning Commission) .
22
23 From the Fire Marshal (Kevin Jenninqs)
24
25 16. Prior to opening for live music I will require a Fire and Life Safety Inspection, and an occupancy
26 check (how many people can safely occupy the business). Both of these items I can do now or
27 any time prior.
28
29 From the Buildinq Official (David Willoughby)
30
31 17. There is currently an active building violation case on this property. Until the violation is abated,
32 an increased use of the facility is not allowed. The following comments are intended to aid the
33 applicant in realizing possible requirements for the project and are not intended as a plan review.
34
35 • Once the violation is abated then a floor plan drawn to scale showing the location of the
36 proposed live entertainment, table and chair layout and exiting will be required to
37 evaluate the possibility of having live entertainment at the facility. Work may be required
38 to bring the second rear exit up to standards.
39
40 Standard Citv Conditions of Approval
41
42 18. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use,
43 including but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have
44 been applied for and issued/finaled.
45
46 19. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
47 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
48
49 20. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
50 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
51 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
52 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
53 and issued.
54
55 21. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any future
56 purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 10
1
2 22. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
3 to building permit final.
4
5 23. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
6 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
7 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
8 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
9 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
10
11 24. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
12 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
13 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or
14 proceeding brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to
15 attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include,
16 but not be limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be
17 asserted by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the
18 City's action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence
19 on the part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is
20 held to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the
21 agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
22
23 9B. Housing Element Update — Request for Planning Commission to make a recommendation of
24 adoption of the City Council for the Negative Declaration and draft Housing Element.
25
26 Principal Planner Thompson:
27 • The Housing Element was reviewed by the Department of Housing and Community Development
28 (HCD) earlier this year. Staff has addressed all of HCD's comments including the requirements of
29 SB2, homeless shelter overlay zone.
30 • At the December 9, 2015 Planning Commission meeting the draft 2014-2019 Housing Element
31 was reviewed in a workshop format where the Commission provided comments which have been
32 incorporated into the document.
33 • Staff is now requesting the Planning Commission make a formal recommendation of adoption of
34 the 2014-2019 draft General Plan Housing Element and corresponding Negative Declaration and
35 Resolution tentatively approving an amendmenUupdate to the Housing Element of the Ukiah
36 General Plan and Negative Declaration to the City Council.
37 • After the City Council adopts the Housing Element, the final step is to submit the document to the
38 Housing and Community Development for possible certification.
39
40 Commissioner Sanders:
41 • While there is reference in the draft Housing Element concerning the conversion of Single family
42 residential homes to professional offices (see page 65, Implementing Tasks, H-2h and page 80)
43 supports that this matter be a little more `forcefully' directed/addressed in the Housing Element
44 Resolution about the conversion issue and zoning.
45 • Has no idea what the State considers an appropriate vacant rate in a community but according to
46 the Housing Element for the City of Ukiah the vacancy rate is 2.6% in the City limits and this
47 appears to be `critical.'
48 • It does not seem right that residential conversions to office space are allowed when the vacancy
49 rate is low in this community. Residential conversions reduces the housing stock on much
50 needed housing opportunities in this community, particularly affordable housing.
51 • Is not asking to change the Housing Element Update document in that the issue of residential
52 conversions is being addressed/acknowledged with implementation tasks and such, but rather
53 directly address this issue in the Resolution tentatively approving the update as required by the
54 State.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 11
1 • Supports that the policies/rules governing conversions in the Housing Element are better
2 addressed in terms of more effectively drawing attention to the issue that this does occur and
3 takes away from the much-needed housing stock in this community.
4
5 Chair Whetzel:
6 • It would appear that conversions would be best addressed during the Building permit process
7 and/or by some other process/approach.
8 • Asked if the better approach might be for the Commission or Council to generate a proposed
9 zoning ordinance amendment to address housing conversions as opposed to formulating text and
10 making changes to the General Plan that is costly and time consuming.
11
12 Commissioner Sanders:
13 • Referred to page 80 of the Housing Element Update, section H-2.h that states, `Do not permit the
14 conversion of single family residential homes to professional offices unless the City's amount of
15 residential units is sufficiently adequate.'What does `sufficiently adequate' means?
16
17 Principal Planner Thompson:
18 • If it is the consensus that housing conversions be addressed in a different manner, it might be a
19 good idea to include an implementation task that could read, `The City shall consider amending
20 the zoning ordinance to not allow home conversions to other uses.' A zoning amendment would
21 trigger/bring about a broader discussion/review concerning housing conversions. More research
22 is likely needed to determine how best to address housing conversions.
23 • Acknowledged the better approach would be to formulate a zoning ordinance amendment and
24 provide the necessary justification thereof that would include more restrictive zoning measures
25 concerning housing conversions.
26 • The term `sufficiently adequate' is open to interpretation and would be part of the discussion
27 should the matter of more intently looking at whether or not housing conversions in this
28 community is really issue/problem where a more arduous approach can be taken.
29 • Consulted with the Building Department and there have no recent housing conversion in the last
30 three years that staff is aware of. Most of the existing conversions in and around the Downtown
31 and/or on Dora Street took place in the past.
32 • Confirmed a zoning ordinance amendment would be the most acceptable approach to not allow
33 housing conversions that may also include a map amendment.
34
35 Commissioner Sanders:
36 • Would like language documented somewhere and/or in the Housing Element that states a zoning
37 ordinance amendment is an acceptable approach to addressing how home conversions should
38 be treated. Is of the opinion this is a need.
39
40 Chair Whetzel:
41 • While the General Plan House Element Update addresses housing conversion and that they
42 should not be allowed, is of the opinion this is not the document where onerous action needs to
43 be taken to alleviate housing conversions but rather should be considered and more appropriately
44 addressed in the zoning ordinance amendment process. The Housing Element already states
45 housing conversions should not be allowed. The Zoning ordinance amendment process would
46 define/outline the criteria/circumstance in which housing conversions can be done. The Housing
47 Element simply describes what we want, but does not explain/quantify how this should be done
48 which is what the zoning ordinance amendment would do given the zoning designation.
49
50 Principal Planner Thompson:
51 • As part of the process would need to quantify what the critical need is for vacancies and/or
52 document/establish what the housing conditions are in this community and determine if there is a
53 housing shortage.
54 • After review of the rental market in Ukiah and a town of this size finds there are a `fair' number of
55 houses for rent.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 12
1 • It would be nice to obtain data concerning vacancies rates and housing stock in Ukiah to
2 determine whether there is a housing issue in Ukiah. Will look into adding more data in this
3 regard.
4
5 Commissioner Hilliker:
6 • Asked if Commissioner Sander's concern about housing conversations pertain to outlying areas
7 or the Downtown area or if the concern expands beyond this?
8
9 Commissioner Sanders:
10 • Her concern is not just within the Downtown area but rather where zoning allows for a commercial
11 use in addition to a residential use. As such, property owners may desire to rent residential units
12 for commercial reasons rather than for people that need housing where the house is converted to
13 a commercial use. Housing conversions take away housing stock that was once in the rental or
14 first time homebuyer market. It is important affordable housing opportunities are available in this
15 community. Many people are paying 50-60°/o of their income on housing. Is of the opinion 2.6%
16 vacancy rate is really low.
17
18 Commissioner Watt:
19 • Asked what the current zoning allows in different areas where a house is located in a commercial
20 zoning district.What must occur to the house before it can be a business rental?
21 • Requested clarification a house in a zoning designation that allows commercial uses is proposed
22 to be divided into office space can this be done over the counter with a building permit such that
23 there is nothing in the zoning code that prohibits this type of conversion.
24 • Asked if Commissioner Sander's concern is in the commercial zoning area that residences are
25 being converted into businesses or outside the commercial area?
26 • To get more of a handle on residential conversions, it appears the best approach is to change the
27 zoning code and go through the process thereof.
28
29 Principle Planner Thompson:
30 • The first step is to identify the use as to whether or not use permit approval is required. If no use
31 permit is required such as an office use near the Downtown, which is an allowed use, it really
32 becomes a building code issue and would typically be a ministerial, over-the-counter type of
33 matter unless the house is being converted to a restaurant, which would not be a ministerial
34 matter.
35 • An office conversion can be expensive.
36 • Confirmed a house being divided into office space in a commercial zone can be done by way of a
37 building permit and confirmed while not preferred, housing conversions to office space in
38 commercial zones are not prohibited.
39
40 Commissioner Sanders:
41 • Her concern is houses in commercially zoned areas can be converted to businesses because it is
42 financially more attractive such that the matter can be handled over the counter with a building
43 permit.Would like the City policy makers to look at this matter.
44
45 Chair Whetzel:
46 • Concern is if conversions into office space are not allowed the rooms can be rented at a premium
47 price because they are so close to the Downtown area. The rooms would not be for low income
48 persons.
49 • Unless there was some restriction on the house requiring that the owner must rent it for low
50 income/affordable housing purposes conversions to office space are allowed in commercial
51 zones and the owner can charge what rent he/she wants per room for a premium downtown
52 commercial house.
53
54 Principal Planner Thompson:
55 • Explained the zoning ordinance amendment process.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 13
1 Commissioner Christensen:
2 • Related to the concern referenced above, the GP Housing Element does state conversion from
3 residential to professional office should not be permitted unless the vacancy rate is sufficiently
4 adequate and that this vacancy rate needs to be more appropriately defined. Questioned while
5 data is not available in this regard how difficult would it be to find a standard for what is an
6 adequate vacancy rate/level in our community?
7
8 Principle Planner Thompson:
9 • Would have to do some research to find what an adequate vacancy rate should be for a town the
10 size of Ukiah. Is not familiar with such a standard, but this type of standard is likely out there and
11 recommends looking at the existing housing conditions in the community to get a better
12 understanding where to go from there.
13
14 Commissioner Watt:
15 • Referred to page 80 of the Housing Element Update and asked what the `goal' regarding section
16 H-2.h represents and/or is classified as? Is it an implementation program task? If there is an
17 implementation program in the Housing Element that says not to permit the conversion of single
18 family residential homes to office spaces how does this translate into action? If there are many
19 implementation measures, generally speaking, how does this translate into action?
20
21 Principal Planner Thompson:
22 • The Housing Element incorporates many implementation measures.
23 • Related to action with regard to adequately addressing implementation tasks of the Housing
24 Element, the annual report to HCD is one form of accountability where we talk about our
25 implementation goals and tasks and what we have done to address them. Sometimes a date is
26 included to document when an action was taken on an implementation goal/task.
27 • Acknowledged there is `housing' work that needs to be done in terms of implementing Housing
28 Element tasks.
29
30 Commissioner Watt:
31 • Again, general speaking, how do implementation programs/tasks in the General Plan Housing
32 Elements get implemented?
33 • Finds there are `lofty' goals in the Housing Element with no way to follow through on
34 implementing them.
35 • Requested clarification a residential area that is not commercial if someone wanted to do a
36 conversion would it not be allowed and is a zoning ordinance amendment the best way to
37 proceed in this regard?
38
39 Principal Planner Thompson:
40 • Generally, city planning staff works on implementation tasks and documents the date when a task
41 is completed/updated and documents the funding source or potential funding source.
42 • Ideally, the preference would be to employ a part-time person that works on housing issues to
43 implement Housing Element implementation tasks and determine which tasks need to be
44 implemented for any given year, determine how best to proceed and rank them according to
45 need/importance. The aforementioned approach would be a way to get Housing Element
46 implementation tasks on the books for action/completion.
47 • Unlike the City of Ukiah, larger jurisdictions have staff members that do just housing-related work.
48 • Confirmed a residential conversion could not occur in a non-commercially zoned area where a
49 zoning ordinance amendment would be necessary.
50 • One approach would be to look at all the commercially zoned areas and determine how many
51 houses exist and/or have been converted to establish a baseline that essentially addresses the
52 current housing conditions.
53
54 Chair Whetzel:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 14
1 • The Planning Commission can look at the zoning ordinance for the Downtown commercial area
2 as it relates to residential housing.
3
4 Commissioner Sanders:
5 • Recommends next time a Housing Element update is necessary include a housing inventory of
6 how many residential units have been converted to office space that can be put in `table' format.
7 The current update does not have this table.
8 • Referred to page 90 of the Housing Element, Implementation Program H-6J (No Net Loss) that
9 appears to be related to the matter of `land' and likes this statement that says, `The City will
10 monitor project approvals and comply with the no net loss requirements of Government Code
11 Section 65863, no zoning amendment or project approval shall reduce the residential density or
12 allow development of any parcel at a lower residential density than assumed in the Housing
13 Element land inventory unless the City makes written findings in accordance with section
14 65682(b).'
15 • Sees conversion of residential units to commercial office space as a problem in our community.
16 Is hopeful City Council will agree that conversions are an issue that need to be addressed in our
17 town.
18 • Recommends the minutes for this meeting and those of December 9, 2016 concerning the
19 General Plan Housing Element Update are included in the staff report for City Council for
20 adoption of the Housing Element.
21 • Referred to page 12 of the draft Housing Element that references ground breaking in 2010 for the
22 Clara Court affordable apartment project and noted this project has been completed where such
23 reference should be deleted from the document.
24 • Referred to page 38 of the draft Housing Element, section related to the zoning and land use
25 controls that references the City is working on a Downtown Zoning Code (DZC) project. This
26 project has been completed and the DZC has been adopted so reference in this regard should be
27 deleted from the document.
28
29 Chair Whetzel:
30 • Is of the opinion conversions in the Downtown area and the spaces created thereof would rent at
31 a premium price unless a restriction is placed in this regard.
32 • Asked about the language on page 38 of the draft Housing Element, zoning and land use section
33 that references the DZC and states `medium and high density housing is permitted in all
34 commercial zoning districts and the Planned Development tool has been used to facilitate
35 unconventional housing and alternate development standards. Zoning is no longer considered a
36 constraint.' Requested clarification that the language in this section says the DZC allows for
37 medium and high density housing and that `houses' then would fall into this category.
38
39 Commissioner Watt:
40 • Procedurally speaking, is it necessary to update City ordinances and zoning codes to be
41 consistent with the General Plan Housing Element?
42 • Page 52 of the Housing element contains a typographical error `Side Development PermiY should
43 read, `Site Development Permit.'
44
45 Principal Planner Thompson:
46 • The State asked that the aforementioned implementation program (H-6J) be included in the
47 Ukiah's Housing Element.
48 • Affirmed City ordinances/zoning code changes/updates are necessary to be consistent with the
49 General Plan Housing Element. An example of this was the approved zoning ordinance
50 amendment per the requirements of SB2 to establish a zoning overlay district where a homeless
51 shelter can be established by right.
52 • While the Housing Element does not need to be updated for another five years, consideration is
53 being given to updating the Ukiah General Plan and this would be a good opportunity to look at
54 land uses.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 15
1 • Related to page 38 would amend the section that talks about zoning and land use control to say
2 the City has adopted the DZC that allows medium and high density housing and confirmed
3 `houses'would fall under this category.
4 • While not seen too much in Ukiah, multi-family housing is allowed in commercially zoned areas
5 without being mixed-use. Is of the opinion the property recently approved for apartments behind
6 Rite Aid is zoned `commercial.' Typically mixed-use projects (residential/commercial) are what
7 developers are looking to pull-off with regard to allowing residential use in commercial zones.
8
9 Sanders/Christensen to recommend City Council adopt the Initial Environmental Study and Negative
10 Declaration for the 2014-2019 General Plan Housing Element Update. Motion carried (5-0).
11
12 Sanders/Christensen to recommend City Council adopt the 2014-2019 General Plan Housing Element
13 Update. Motion carried (5-0).
14
15 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
16 Principal Planner Thompson:
17 • There is a Planning Commissioner academy in San Ramon.
18 • Planning Commission stipend checks will be sent next week.
19 • The PEP Senior Housing has applied for a building permit.
20
21 Commissioner Watt:
22 • Inquired about the transfer of ownership from the City to PEP Senior Housing
23
24 Principal Planner Thompson:
25 • Legal documents are required before a change in ownership can occur.
26 • Chipotle restaurant has `broken ground.'
27 • Anticipates a decision concerning Costco will be made in February or March.
28 • The developer for the Rite Aid apartment project wants to change the development plans.
29 • There has been no recent Zoning Administrator action.
30 • City Council will approve a demolition permit to demolish a single family dwelling located at 517
31 S. Main Street for the PEP Senior Housing project.
32 • City Council at the regular January 20, 2016 meeting is to adopt a resolution authorizing the City
33 to join the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program that is part of the fee deferral economic
34 development effort. The City has a policy in place where developers can defer water/sewer fees
35 for projects until certificate of occupancy. The Statewide Community Infrastructure Program
36 would essentially finance the aforementioned infrastructure fees over the course of several years.
37 • The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian
38 Master Plan at the regular January 27 meeting.
39
40 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
41 Commissioner Hilliker:
42 • Noted the two homes being refurbished on Main Street that were very run-down and an eyesore
43 are a product of nice work.
44
45 Commissioner Watt:
46 • Asked about the RFPs concerning the City-owned property on Main Street.
47
48 Principal Planner Thompson:
49 • Confirmed three RFPs have been received. City Council supports market rate housing
50 opportunities manifest for the City-owned property on Main Street.
51
52 12. ADJOURNMENT
53 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:21 p.m.
54
55 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016
Page 16
Attachm�nt # �
Michelle Johnson
From: Charley Stump
Sent: Wednesday,January 13, 2016 3:48 PM
To: Kevin Thompson; Michelle Johnson
Subject: FW: Forest Club and Music
Chnrley Stump, Director
Plnnning and Community Development
City of Ukiah
300 Seminnry Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482
(707) 463-6219 / cstump@cityofukiah.com
�lonning@cityofukinh.com
From: Cynthia Ariosta [mailto:saucyukiah@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 3:30 PM
To: Charley Stump
Subject: Forest Club and Music
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am unable to attend tonight's Planning Commission meeting,on which a Public Hearing is agendized regarding live
music at the Forest Club.
I want to submit this letter as unwavering support for the Forest Club offering live music at their venue. I have noticed
that there has been a notable decrease of business traffic in the downtown area since The Ukiah Brewing
Company/Ritual ceased offering live music. Live music not only brings business to the venue offering it;the increased
foot traffic downtown of the attendees certainly helps to support local restaurants as well as other merchants in the
area. Increased traffic downtown, of course, increases tax dollars generated for the City, as well as supports the
employees in jobs created by these small businesses.
Live music is an integral part of a vibrant and exciting downtown area. The City of Ukiah is making great progress in
attracting attention and business to our powntown, and permitting live music in a commercial venue in a commercial
zone is a natural part of that progress. Any action other than allowing the Forest Club to offer live music is counter to
that progress. I encourage you to vote in support of the Forest Club offering live music.
Thank you for your time.
Best Regards,
Cynthia Ariosta
The Big Cheese
Saucy
i
1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 January 27, 2016
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Mike Whetzel, Chair Laura Christensen
7 Christopher Watt Mark Hilliker
8 Linda Sanders
9
10 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
11 Kevin Thompson, Principal Planner Listed below, Respectively
12 Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works
13 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
14
15 1. CALL TO ORDER
16 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at
17 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
18
19 2. ROLL CALL
20
21 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
22
23 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —The minutes from the January 13, 2016 meeting will be included for
24 review and approval at the February 10, 2016 meeting.
25
26 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
27
28 6. APPEAL PROCESS
29
30 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
31
32 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE-Confirmed by Staff.
33
34 9. PUBLIC WORKSHOP
35 9A. Public Review and Input on the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
36
37 Principal Planner Thompson:
38 • The Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public workshop concerning the Ukiah Bicycle
39 and Pedestrian Master Plan.
40 • The public is invited to provide comments/input and ask questions about the plan.
41 • No action on the document is requested tonight.
42
43 Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor presented the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan for
44 public comments:
45 • Related to the history of the plan, the City Public Works Department sought funding through the
46 Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG)to pay for the plan.
47 • After the funding was awarded, the City went out for a RFP and successfully negotiated a
48 contract with Alta Planning and Design for preparation of the plan. Public Works also worked with
49 sub-consultants Whitlock &Weinberger Transportation, Inc. (W-Trans) and Walk Bike Mendocino
50 for assistance with specific parts of the plan.
51 • The goal of the plan is to improve bicycling and walking in the City as an alternate and convenient
52 transportation/recreation option. This plan, when adopted, will replace the City of Ukiah Bicycle
53 and Pedestrian Master Plan that was adopted by the Ukiah City Council in 1999.
54 • Welcomes public inpuUcomments/questions regarding the plan.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 1
1 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:05 p.m.
2
3 Jennifer Riddell:
4 • Read in the local paper about the workshop today and was not aware the City had a
5 bicycle/pedestrian master plan.
6 • Inquired where she could access the plan to read so as to provide helpful comments.
7
8 Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor:
9 • Advised of various sources to access the plan, including where to find the plan on the City's
10 website. A copy of the plan can be found at the County library and in City Hall Administration
11 building,
12 • The City is receiving public comments from January 12, 2016 through February 29, 2016.
13
14 John Johns:
15 • Is a longtime resident of Ukiah and is highly familiar with bicycle routes in and around the City
16 and alternate routes he used as a child growing up to navigate around town and regionally when
17 there were essentially no bike lanes to speak of.
18 • While he has not reviewed the current bicycle and pedestrian master plan he has reviewed older
19 past City plans as well as plans in other cities and countries.
20 • Related to bicycling:
21 ■ Dora Street has nice bicycle lanes for people to use.
22 ■ What typically occurs in many cities is they do not put the bicycle lanes on the outside of
23 parked cars, i.e., first comes the sidewalk, parked cars, and bike lane. Has observed
24 some places put the bike lane next to the sidewalk where cars can park along side of the
25 bike lane. Is of the opinion the aforementioned approach is a safe way to put a bike lane
26 and explained how so. Does not support putting bike lanes 'outside' of the parked cars.
27 ■ The City has bike lanes that extend north and south, not many bike lanes exist east and
28 west and would like to see this occur.
29 • Would like to see more bike lanes constructed near shopping areas/commercial
30 establishments.
31 ■ Would like to see designated bike parking areas and/or places where bikes can be safely
32 stored in and around the City that are close to services and shopping areas.
33 ■ Would encourage commercial/retail establishments/schools/agencies/organizations to
34 install bike racks that have some sort of cover/shelter for protection purposes, particularly
35 for those persons who bicycle to work and must leave their bikes parked for long periods
36 of time.
37 ■ Would encourage children to bicycle for health purposes.
38 ■ Would like the City to pursue grants to install bicycle parking in `hot spots'/specific areas
39 in town where people can rent bikes and be able to drop them off at some other
40 designated `hot spot' location.
41 ■ Talked about bicycling on State Street and School Street and finds School Street to be
42 dangerous because there is diagonal parking where people can inadvertently back up
43 into a bicyclist.
44 ■ Would like to see more rules enforced regarding bike riding and cited a bicyclist as an
45 example of creating a dangerous situation by riding through every stop sign. People need
46 to understand the rules of the road as it pertain to bicycling.
47 ■ The veterans building provides lockers for those persons riding bikes.
48
49 Commissioner Sanders:
50 • The aforementioned suggestions made by Mr. Johns are discussed in the plan.
51
52 Scott Cratty:
53 • Is a recent bicycle enthusiast.
54 • Had no knowledge the City had a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
55 • Would like to see more publicity about the plan.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 2
1 • Had no idea there is an open comment period concerning the plan. As such, there are likely a lot
2 of people who do not know they have an opportunity to comment on the plan.
3 • Visited a place that had great bicycle infrastructure and people biked everywhere. Observed that
4 people were healthy.
5 • Resides on the east side of the Valley out of the City limits and bikes to work on the west side of
6 town. As such, there is a bike lane on the east side of Perkins Street that ends when he gets to
7 the City of Ukiah borders. There are no other bike lanes until he gets to Dora Street in the
8 process of riding his bike to work.
9 • After he is able to review the plan is hopeful it is going to show some nice, clear bike
10 infrastructure paths that go easUwest and a couple that go north/side. Is of the opinion, there is a
11 great opportunity in the City to have a really `bikeable' community with the addition of some
12 `serious' infrastructure for safety purposes.
13
14 Iva Jo Pedersen:
15 • Appreciates that Ukiah has a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
16 • Resides in the County on Old River Road and bicycles on Talmage Road.
17 • Her bicycle wish list includes:
18 • Extend bicycle paths/lanes in the City to include Talmage Road and surrounding regional
19 areas. Many people bicycle on Talmage Road to get to Old River Road. Old River Road
20 has a lot of bike traffic from local persons and persons that come from the out-of-town.
21 Discussed popular bike paths/routes in the Talmage Area that people use.
22
23 Chair Whetrel:
24 • Is hopeful there is some type of bicycle/pedestrian plan that includes County participation to help
25 broaden/shape/scope bike/pedestrian-related projects that connect/link to existing and/or future
26 bike/pedestrian pathways from the City to the County.
27
28 Pinky Kushner:
29 • Related to the matter of the City tying in with the County pertinent to bike/pedestrian pathway
30 projects, one of the goals in the plan mentions County and City tie-ins regionally.
31 • The plan talks about bicycling and walking for a destination such as shopping or to go school and
32 notes in addition there is a lot of walking that is done for ruminating, being able to stroll, etc.
33 • The City of Ukiah is 27.7% Hispanic/Latino and it is part of this culture to customarily walk after
34 dinner or at different times of the day. Finds this ethnic group uses the walkways at Coyote Dam
35 and recently completed City Rail Trail. Recommends the plan introduction mention that
36 walking/strolling or walking for contemplation/walking as a social activity also occurs in addition to
37 walking for the purpose of reaching a designation or for recreation.
38 • Related to walking in the Downtown, noted some former Councilmembers spent considerable
39 time and effort implementing signs in sidewalks that lead/direct people/visitors around the historic
40 Downtown core and this aspect is not mentioned in the plan.
41 • Is of the opinion the public should have access to the City `Fish Hatchery' on Standley Street via
42 a walkable pathway.
43 • Giorno Street, Standley Street and Todd Grove Park loops around and this is a really
44 beautiful/popular walking area and should be mentioned in the plan.
45 • The City View Trail and regional trails i.e., Mendocino-Lake trail and the Valley View Trail should
46 also be included/mentioned in the plan.
47 • There should be a paragraph about how walking is a regional activity along with hiking and would
48 assist with formulating a paragraph in this regard to be included in the plan. Acknowledged
49 regional walking is a tourist attraction and sees the value of encouraging an increased
50 commercial trade for Ukiah and Ukiah Valley. Publicizing Ukiah as a walkable city would assist
51 with increased commerce trade and tourist attraction.
52 • Would like to see a table that effectively lists inexpensive projects and at the top of the project list
53 would be to list the `walk-around' around Todd Grove Park as a popular walking route.
54 • The stone wall around the Todd Grove Park is deteriorating and is a Works Project Administration
55 (WPA) relic that should be protected.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 3
1 • Tree canopy is referenced in the bike/pedestrian plan and is an important element to have on
2 pathways.
3 • The plan references sidewalk furniture, but does not mention the obstacles that exist in the
4 sidewalk that impede foot traffic and include utility poles, fire hydrants, etc. A person cannot walk
5 down Perkins Street if one has a stroller because the sidewalk is too narrow and is of the opinion
6 there should be mention of this in the plan and identify a strategy for what measures can be taken
7 to do away with these obstructions. Would like to know what the ADA standards are for sidewalks
8 and whether this information is included in the plan with clear reference to where the City is not
9 compliant with ADA standards. This information needs to be corrected.
10 • The list of coordinating departments that helped to formulate the plan is missing. There are City
11 departments other than Public Works such as Ukiah Unified School District, committees/boards
12 and/or other organizations that were likely involved in the process. Would like to see what
13 comments the aforementioned departments/agencies/organizations contributed to the plan.
14 • According to the local newspaper article regarding the plan states some of the highest ranking
15 projects include `improvements to the intersection of Gobbi Street and S. Dora Street at Yokayo
16 Elementary School that consist of five lanes on Gobbi Street, a roundabout at N. Bush Street and
17 Low Gap Road and improvements to the intersection at Despina Drive and Low Gap Road. The
18 proposed roundabout at Bush Street and Low Gap Road has had a lot of criticism and has not
19 heard of anyone in the community that speaks in favor of the project. Is of the opinion this project
20 should not be part of the plan.
21
22 Chair Whetzel:
23 • Page 24 of the plan has a map that illustrates four walking routes around Ukiah.
24 • Is of the opinion the plan pertains to Ukiah rather than regionally.
25 • Is of the opinion the proposed roundabout at Bush Street and Low Gap Road is not very walker
26 friendly.
27
28 Pinky Kushner:
29 • The proposed roundabout is not walker friendly.
30 • Referred to Figure 16 on page 56 of the plan that shows proposed existing/planned pedestrian
31 facilities and is of the opinion as it relates to pathways and/or corridor networks that there are
32 actually more foot paths than are mentioned in the map. Figure 16 should be enlarged for better
33 understanding and include changes to streets/pathways as it relates to the proposed new
34 Courthouse project with an explanation of how the new Courthouse is going to be pedestrian
35 friendly.
36 • The connection to the Orr Creek trail is included in the aforementioned map, but incorporates no
37 detail. It would be helpful to have an enlargement of this pathway.
38 • People walk to Low Gap Park from the City center/hub and this is a nice walk. Is of the opinion
39 this should be viewed as one of the City trails.
40 • Section 4.2.2 on page 57 of the plan does say sidewalk gaps present a serious mobility issue for
41 those who use assistive mobility devices and strollers and emphasized the importance of
42 identifying the location where disability vehicles and strollers cannot go due to obstacles in the
43 sidewalks.
44 • Referred to page 60 of the plan that talks about improvement recommendations for Main Street
45 and with reducing the travel lane to a 10-foot width to accommodate 5-foot Class II bicycle lanes
46 in each direction and is of the opinion Main Street does not need a bike lane. There is a great
47 bike lane two blocks away that goes along the railroad tracks. Is fine with reducing the travel lane
48 on Main Street and put in more trees. Main Street can function as a secondary thoroughfare with
49 trees that make the street pleasingly walkable.
50 • Likes the idea of `refuge islands' which are likely the same as `center islands' but does not see
51 mention of this and what is to occur in this regard.
52 • Finds the action portion of the plan to be `very weak.'
53 • The section concerning funding is very good but recommends dividing the issue of funding into
54 what kinds of projects could go into which funding category.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 4
1 • There needs to be some statement included in the plan that notes when there is a new project
2 such as the Talmage Road intersection exchange for the Costco project that the improvements
3 include full bicycle and pedestrian capabilities.
4 • The plan mentions Orchard Avenue as having a bike lane and is of the opinion the Orchard
5 Avenue bike lane should extend from Raley's grocery store all the way to the proposed Costco
6 site. It would be easy enough to do this.
7 • The `plan' is just a 'plan' and is good for a number of years. As such, it is important to think ahead
8 about `things'that would be beneficial to include.
9
10 Chair Whetzel:
11 • Is of the opinion the new City Rail Trail should extend from Raley's to Walmart and/or at least to
12 Hastings Avenue.
13
14 Pinky Kushner:
15 • The aforementioned comment is a good idea and did not see this aspect mentioned in the plan.
16 • Is of the opinion there should be future discussion about having a bike path that extends to
17 Talmage and likewise to Mendocino College and this should be mentioned as part of future
18 planning in the plan.
19
20 Susan Knopf:
21 • Congratulated the authors of the plan and is of the opinion the plan is a good one.
22 • Is pleased with the new City bicycle and pedestrian rail trail and plans for extension thereof. Is
23 pleased with the proposed Orr Creek Greenway project. This pathway is very important because
24 it would connect Low Gap Park, Pomolita School, Ukiah High School and the Russian River
25 Cemetery, Mendocino County Administrative offices and the City baseball field that exists across
26 Highway 101.
27 • While not exactly a designated pathway, is also pleased to have a walking path that goes around
28 Todd Grove Park. This route is used all the time. The problem with this pathway is no one knows
29 when someone may back up and not see the person walking the pathway behind. The ideal
30 condition would be to have the path go around the outside of the protective wall of the park. This
31 would create a buffer zone for the walkers. To get this initiated could begin with some parking
32 striping to get people used to not parking up against the protective wall.
33 • The `ranking/prioritizing of standards' for pathways should be revised because people have
34 different reasons for walking, i.e., strolling, a specific destination, recreational purposes, etc.
35 • Related to ranking of standards for pathways, the Todd Grove path is one block away from
36 Pomolita Middle School, a half of block away from a nursery school, and the Lutheran Church is
37 located in the same area. While a walkable pathway to Anton Stadium and Giorno street is also
38 located in the same vicinity, this is not mentioned in the plan and is a well-used walking pathway
39 route that interconnects with the Todd Grove Park pathway and other pathways in the area.
40 These areas/neighborhood interconnect with one another and are regularly used by people to get
41 to the ballpark, municipal swimming pool, golf course clubhouse and/or other places as they walk
42 around the community. Finds it important to interconnect these popular walking routes by
43 establishing an interface by better defining how such routes should be addressed as a future
44 detail in the plan.
45 • Noted the Assembly of God Church is included in the Todd Grove Park route.
46 • Would support changing the bicycle/pedestrian plan title to the `Walk `n Roll Plan.'
47 • As a pedestrian, the biggest issue she has concerns sidewalk obstructions that exist everywhere
48 such as signs, utility poles and/or utility related facilities, fire hydrants, etc.
49 • Would like to see a minimum of 5-foot sidewalks with no obstructions with 2-foot planting strip
50 between the curb and the sidewalk. This would be a place where the existing obstructions can be
51 placed. Is not requesting an extreme retrofit take place of all City sidewalks but rather for new
52 construction and with necessary repairs/improvements that need to be done overtime to better
53 the condition of the sidewalks for safety and ease of navigate for pedestrians.
54 • Would support having more trees on established walk/bicycle trails since most people typically
55 use these trails during the day as opposed to night-time and this would provide shade on these
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 5
1 trails. Providing for trees on new rail trails should be made a requirement and effectively
2 engineered to accompanying trees for shade purposes.
3
4 Bruni Kobbe:
5 • Finds the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to be a good overview of all the information
6 collected by the various participating groups, i.e., trail groups and bike/pedestrian groups.
7 • The plan document mentions a 1999 and 2012 bike/pedestrian plan. Is not clear whether these
8 former plans included regional areas and/or what has been accomplished since this time. Are we
9 just repeating what has been written or is another study the intent using the same
10 criteria/information/issues mentioned in the former plans?Will the goals be the same?
11 • Likes the new NWP Rail Trail and supports expansion thereof.
12 • Finds the plan `short' on the `action' section of the plan and how funding for bike/pedestrian
13 projects is to be appropriated and recommends improving this category.
14 • One general observation is that bicyclist and pedestrians have to be kept away from cars and not
15 the other way around. Again, cars need to be kept away from pedestrians. Cited an example at
16 the intersection of Grove Avenue and N. Dora Street where the suggestion is to eliminate one
17 pedestrian crossing and this would encumber pedestrians.
18 • Talked about the proposed extension of Clay Street connecting to Peach Street that will cross
19 over the railroad tracks and possibly beyond to Orchard Avenue and the plans for pedestrian
20 crossings.
21
22 Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor:
23 • The Clay Street extension project will include sidewalks on both sides of the street.
24
25 Bruni Kobbe:
26 • It would be a major accomplishment for the Clay Street extension to have sidewalks as part of the
27 project.
28 • Would like to make the Clay Street extension `walkable' and `bikeable' and is of the opinion
29 beginning at the railroad crossing on Clay street that proposed access continuing to Peach Street
30 be for pedestrians and bicyclists only and not for cars. Cars should be able to go around to
31 Perkins Street and to Orchard Avenue and/or to other connecting streets rather than via the Clay
32 Street extension to Peach Street. It is easier for cars to take alternative routes than it is for
33 pedestrians. This is the opportunity to make a statement about promoting walkability and
34 bicycling in our community. Related to the proposed Hospital Drive extension continuing to the
35 new Courthouse site that is located in the same vicinity as the historical Railroad Depot should be
36 strictly for pedestrian and bicycle use. Construction of a street in this area would destroy the
37 existing pocket park and the only riparian area that was successfully restored in an otherwise
38 once barren site we have in the Downtown. While streets are necessary to help drivers get
39 around town, pathways and sidewalks for pedestrians and bicyclists can be an effective way to
40 navigate around town in a safe manner and at the same time promotes good health. Supports the
41 concept of promoting walkability and bicycling in our community where people have the option of
42 getting out of their cars. We do not need a street every 100 yards for cars and is of the opinion
43 this is `last century thinking.'
44 • Related to street extensions in the Perkins Street/Hospital Drive/Main Street/Clay
45 Street/Stephenson Street area, it is important to protect Gibson Creek. In fact, a promise was
46 made that Gibson Creek would be `daylighted' in the Downtown area and explained where this
47 can occur such that the opportunity exists to make this a walkable area. This might be a long term
48 project but the effort should be made. If not asked for, we do not get it.
49 • If we are serious about walkability in our community creeks must be considered. Is pleased we
50 have a group working on the Orr Creek Greenway project.
51 • That part of Gibson Creek that flows through the Downtown is in dire need of some help.
52 • The plan should mention the importance of considering and tying in of the regional aspects of
53 providing for pedestrian and bicycle facilities outside of the Downtown and City limits by
54 interconnecting pathways and bicycle lanes City to County.
55 • Public should have access to the City Fish Hatchery in the Western Hills.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 6
1 • Consider a methodology for allowing the public to cross the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course that
2 could enhance connectivity with other existing pathways in the area.
3 • The intersection of Gobbi Street and Orchard Street was safer before the traffic light was
4 installed.
5
6 Phil Baldwin:
7 • While there may be prefunding available for the proposed Streetscape Road Diet Plan for State
8 Street, the project`is not a done deal.'
9 • While he has not read the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan appreciates the hard work that has
10 gone into formulating it.
11 • Has no knowledge whether or not the Streetscape Road Diet Plan that involves 10 blocks of
12 State Street adversely conflicts with the City of Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and is
13 hopeful there is no conflict.
14 • Essentially questions how diagonal parking fits in with a high quality bike path. Given that MCOG
15 has set aside between one or two million dollars for the streetscape improvemenUrenovation
16 project for State Street this represents a `radical' change. There is a significant element in our
17 community that will oppose the aforementioned Streetscape Road Diet Plan. If the proposed
18 project does not move forward, the money would be sent back to MCOG.
19 • Has observed in residential zones that people do not walk on sidewalks but rather in the streets
20 and this may be because many City sidewalks are not wide enough and there is often shrubbery
21 that impedes travel.
22 • Is pleased the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan focuses on the Downtown area. The closer
23 people get to the higher traffic areas the more people do walk on sidewalks rather than on the
24 streets.
25 • Another issue is how to provide better connecting access to the beautiful new City Riverside
26 Park. Believes Councilmember Crane recommended reconfiguration of Gibson Creek to its
27 original passageway could initiate improved access to Riverside Park and explained in more
28 detail how this could occur.
29 • It may be a pedestrian pathway that follows Orr Creek can be created that goes under the
30 freeway provided it is not located in the floodway zone that would disallow such a project to
31 occur.
32
33 Daphne MacNeil:
34 • Many of her comments have been made by other public speakers this evening.
35 • A reason people walk in the street may be because the driveway aprons are so steep that make
36 navigating effectively and safely on sidewalks difficult for persons pushing strollers, aided by
37 crutches, etc.
38 • Has concern about the State Street Diet plan and finds diagonal (angled) parking to be hazardous
39 to bicyclists. Tinted car window makes it difficult to see when a car is pulling out of the parking
40 space where she could potentially be hit by a car. When people back up, they are typically not
41 looking for bicyclists. Would not personally want to ride a bike on State Street if there is angled
42 parking. School Street has angled parking.
43
44 Pinky Kushner:
45 • Commented on the `new way' of planning streets. Holland is removing sidewalks and effectively
46 comingling/orchestrating the maneuvering/traveling of cars, pedestrians and bicycles. The
47 appearance of people and bicycles in streets forces cars to slow down/stop and wonders if our
48 City Planning/Public Works staff could talk about the Holland plan and why the City is going in the
49 direction of 50s thinking when we are talking about the planning of streets.
50
51 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
52 • There is a section of the Vehicle Code that addresses in places where sidewalks do not exist,
53 pedestrians are supposed to walk on the side of the street facing traffic. This is the safest
54 approach because people have a good view of oncoming traffic and provided examples of
55 locations where this occurs in town.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 7
1 • Most funding comes through MCOG originating from Caltrans and acceptance of this funding
2 requires the City follow State standards with regard to streets/sidewalks. The other aspect is that
3 Caltrans funding allows recipients to look at what they call `complete streets' and this pertains to
4 all modes of transportation on a street that include vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians as well as
5 ADA curb compliant ramps on street corners.
6
7 John Johns:
8 • Related to bicycle trails on City streets in the Downtown area such as School Street, State Street
9 and Main Street supports these streets have bike lanes particularly to provide availability for
10 bicycles to get to stores and services.
11 • Again supports parallel parking where the bike lane is located between the parked cars and the
12 sidewalk for safety purposes.
13 • Supports having bicycle racks at various locations in town that would assist employees and
14 visitors.
15 • Likes what Holland is doing by having infrastructure in place to safely allow the intermingling of
16 vehicles, pedestrian and bicycles.
17 • Supports having a bike trail in the Riverside Park area along the Russian River that connects with
18 the BMX sports track, Gobbi Street and beyond to Dora Street and Highland Avenue. There could
19 be a bike trail that essentially extents from Barnes Street and/or vicinity to Todd Grove Park that
20 leads to Dora Street and Ukiah southward. As a child, he took many back roads routes on bicycle
21 such as on Helen Avenue where Nokomis Elementary School is located to the former Hillside
22 Hospital to where Grace Hudson Elementary is now located and onward to the Oak Knoll area.
23 • Would like to see a bike route from Low Gap Road to the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. There
24 could be a bike route from Low Gap Road to the Ukiah High School to Lovers Lane.
25 • Questions whether or not it is actually doable/feasible to have a bike lane that extends on State
26 Street from Grace Hudson School to the Downtown area supports the possibility.
27 • It is a good idea to tie-in County regional pedestrian/bike facilities with City if possible.
28
29 Chair Whetzel:
30 • The aforementioned routes discussed above are documented on page 50 of the plan (Figure 15:
31 Proposed Bicycle Facility).
32 • Noted areas located in the County are not included in the plan although there is a narrative about
33 tying in County regional areas with the City as it relates to possibly connecting pedestrian/bicycle
34 pathways/lanes.
35
36 Pinky Kushner:
37 • The scenario of having pedestrian/bicycle lanes and vehicles and then the center of the road
38 where the action is simultaneously occurring is a very interesting concept. Referred to Golden
39 Gate Park in San Francisco and noted Kennedy Drive used to be a speedway for horses and was
40 originally designed as such. When cars came along Kennedy Drive became a real speedway. A
41 few years ago this entire roadway was reconfigured. Cars that park along Kennedy Drive in
42 Golden Gate Park have to parallel park in what appears to be the middle of their lane of travel.
43 The bicycles navigate on the inside of the roadway and pedestrians operate further beyond this. It
44 is amazing to see how pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles navigate harmoniously. It was
45 confusing in the beginning and it took some educating, but now it works perfectly, particularly with
46 drivers learning to park without the curb to match up against. The speed on Kennedy Drive is now
47 15 mph.
48 • Related to funding, many communities fund their roadway improvements through collecting
49 money from parking meters and parking tickets. Parking meter and parking ticket money for the
50 City of Ukiah goes to the Police Department and is part of the Police Department budget. Would
51 like to investigate why this money is appropriated to the UPD.
52
53
54 Break: 7:05 p.m.
55 Reconvene: 7:10 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 8
1 Susan Knopf:
2 • The issue with roundabouts is that people do not know how to use them.
3
4 Chair Whetzel:
5 • Roundabouts do not appear to be pedestrian friendly.
6 • The problem concerning the proposed roundabout on Low Gap Road is related to the stop signs
7 on Despina Drive where people would be stopped in the circle on Bush Street going nowhere
8 because the stop sign on Despina Drive backs everyone up. Finds what presently happens is
9 traffic backs up all way down to Bush Street. As such, is of the opinion a roundabout would not
10 work and is not a good idea.
11
12 Susan Knopf:
13 • Related to roundabouts, crosswalks come before the circle and explained how roundabouts
14 should be used.
15
16 John Johns:
17 • Questions if there are plans to have a bike lane from Mill Street to Dora Street.
18
19 Chair Whetrel:
20 • The intent of the plan is to likely consider a specific portion of the City and `make it all flow' in
21 terms of providing for pedestrian walkways and bicycle lanes having interconnecting networks
22 with certain City streets.
23
24 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:20 p.m.
25
26 Commissioner Sanders:
27 • Referred to page 93 of the plan, section 5.5 would like information regarding priority project
28 sheets:
29 ■ NWP Rail Trail Project Phase 2 (Gobbi Street to Commerce Drive)
30 ■ Clay Street/Peach Street Improvements and NWP Crossing
31 ■ Gobbi Street Bike Lanes (Oak Street to Dora Street)
32 ■ Orr Creek Greenway Feasibility Study
33 ■ Orchard Avenue Bike Lanes (Gobbi Street to Perkins Street)
34 • Referencing past plans, i.e., 1999 and 2012, inquired if some of the aforementioned bullets are
35 carryovers from prior plans. While the Orr Creek Greenway Feasibility Study scored high in
36 terms of importance is lower on the priority list and does not know if the projects are ranked in
37 order of priority.
38
39 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
40 • Does not know for sure if the aforementioned projects are ranked by priority. However, does
41 recall at a Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan workshop a couple of years ago that the NWP
42 Rail Trail Phase 2 and Orr Creek Greenway Feasibility Study were the top two projects.
43 • Since the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was published, funding for the NWP Rail Trail
44 Project Phase 2 has been received and is currently going through the initiating process. This
45 process takes a while because the project is federally funded and must go through all the
46 design, environmental and construction phases of processing.
47 • Will respond to some of the other aforementioned comments made above.
48
49 Chair Whetzel:
50 • Are there plans to have `right-of-way connectors' to the NWP Rail Trail from the trail to Waugh
51 Lane and Talmage area and would there be some main thoroughfare to get onto the trail?
52 • The area on Leslie Street and Clay Street is related to the proposed new Courthouse project and
53 assumes this is the reason for the proposed street extensions.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 9
1 • Is the Courthouse project a State project?As such, does the community have any input regarding
2 the feasibility of providing for bicycling/walking facilities in this area or does the State have its own
3 plan in this regard.
4
5 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
6 • Rail Trail connectors/thoroughfares are likely associated with private property where the City has
7 no access so some type of agreement would have to be worked out.
8 • One possible access to the west side of the proposed Rail Trail is where Cherry Street dead-ends
9 right near the proposed trail.
10 • Confirmed the Clay Street/Stephenson Street/Hospital Drive extensions are related to the new
11 Courthouse project. The Clay Street crossing would provide a connector to the extension of
12 Hospital Drive that is in the area of the proposed new Courthouse.
13 • Confirmed the new Courthouse project is a State project. The State has been working with City
14 Planning and Public Works staff concerning pedestrian access through the site.
15 • Related to the question whether or not some of the projects listed on Priority Project Sheet are
16 carry-overs from previous plans noted the Clay StreeUPeach Street improvement project was
17 identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that was approved in 1999.
18 • Related to priority project— Orchard Avenue Bike Lanes (Gobbi Street to Perkins Street), project
19 has not been completed for this stretch and is still on the books that is specifically addressed on
20 page 98 of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
21 • The stretch of the Rail Trail from Gobbi Street to Commerce Drive is identified as NWP Rail Trail
22 Project Phase 2.
23 • The Orr Creek Greenway Feasibility Study is a new project and was not included in previous
24 plans.
25
26 Commissioner Sanders:
27 • Related to the Orr Creek Greenway Feasibility Study referenced on page 96 of the Bicycle and
28 Pedestrian Master Plan inquired why there was no cost attributed to the Orr Creek Greenway
29 project. Noted some projects ascertain cost estimates, but the Orr Creek Greenway project does
30 not and it would be helpful to have an idea about the cost.
31
32 Commissioner Watt:
33 • Referred to pages 82 and 84 of the plan, Table 26: Prioritization Criteria and Table 28:
34 Prioritization Matrix, and the criteria for schools, recreation, employment/shopping, safety and
35 connectivity/the associated point allocation system and inquired how the criteria `themselves' is
36 selected? How is the Prioritization Matrix table developed?
37 • Related to the criteria table concerning `Connectivity' where it may be a pedestrian or bikeway
38 network facility is somehow impaired such that small changes could be done to improve it where
39 the end result allows the facility to function better collectively overall and benefits the community
40 and is this aspect addressed in the plan? This is one idea he has. More specifically as it relates to
41 the concept of`Connectivity' in association with a particular pedestrian or bikeway network facility
42 that with a few `tweaks' might make the facility function better so it benefits the community and
43 satisfies the criteria for 'connectivity' as provided for in prioritization matrix and is this how the
44 prioritization matrix is formulated/correlated with the criteria table? One idea that may be an
45 example of `connectivity' is to plant trees to improve the quality of the facility, such as for a
46 pedestrian/bicycle pathway. This would be a small change that would improve the quality of the
47 facility.
48 • Related to that section of E. Gobbi Street where a person leaves the City limits just past Oak
49 Manor Park between this area and Riverside Park inquired if this is a County jurisdiction?
50 • Related to the Streetscape plan for State Street, presumes it is intended to slow down traffic and
51 make this street more pedestrian friendly and less congested and inquired if the environmental
52 analysis is complete? Has consideration been given to how the State Street improvement plan
53 might push traffic onto other corridors? If the improvements slow down traffic on State Street
54 people are going to look for other ways to navigate around. Right now Dora Street provides this
55 accommodation.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 10
1 • It appears the bicycle facilities that are being proposed for other north/south thoroughfares should
2 consider the potential impact the Streetscape Improvement project to State Street in the
3 Downtown area might have on these facilities.
4 • Related to the `Prioritization Criteria' in the plan concerning other facilities where people gather
5 like churches asked if this criteria was looked at in addition to the criteria for `schools,'
6 'recreation,' etc.? There are other places people go quite often to gather and should likely be a
7 consideration.
8 • Would like the opportunity to review the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan again.
9 • Would like more copies of the plan to be distributed in fundamental locations so more
10 people/agencies have the opportunity to review and provide input.
11
12 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
13 • Will research the answer to the aforementioned inquiry regarding the cost analysis for the Orr
14 Creek Greenway project.
15 • The evaluation criteria and prioritization matrix tables were developed by the consultants and
16 cannot say exactly how this was done other than the consultants have done many bicycle and
17 pedestrian master plans where it is likely the tables were developed when considering what
18 information a plan should contain.
19 • Confirmed the Oak Manor subdivision is the City limits. Beyond this area is County jurisdiction.
20 Riverside Park is City jurisdiction that roughly consists of one-third/one quarter of a mile stretch
21 down E. Gobbi Street. Babcock Lane is County jurisdiction.
22 • The environmental analysis required for the Ukiah Downtown Streetscape Improvement Plan has
23 been completed.
24 • How the Streetscape Improvement project might affect other street corridors would be addressed
25 in the environmental document with Caltrans assistance.
26
27 Chair Whetzel:
28 • It appears the consensus of the public speakers did not hear about the workshop tonight until
29 they read it in the paper today.
30 • Was hoping to hear comments from the authors/consultants of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
31 Plan. It would be beneficial to have the consultants available to answer questions.
32 • Would like to see a PowerPoint presentation with map representation as a visual aid for better
33 understanding of the existing/proposed bicycle/pedestrian facilities.
34 • Is of the opinion another workshop is necessary having a 'little more detail' so the Planning
35 Commission can make a sound and informed decision/recommendation about the plan.
36 • Would like the opportunity for the Planning Commission to review the plan again with more detail
37 as to what we are looking at in the way of adopting a valuable/helpful/effective plan.
38
39 Commissioner Sanders:
40 • Providing a workshop having more detail would give her a little more `Proforma' to make a
41 decision/recommendation about the plan.
42 • It is important the public get their questions answered.
43 • It may be more copies of the plan should be made readily available for the public to review at
44 various locations/related-agencies.
45
46 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
47 • The intent of tonighYs workshop was to hear and consider comments from the public.
48 • Public comments regarding the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan are welcomed through to
49 February 29, 2016 where the intent is to take the comments and report back to the Ukiah City
50 Council.
51 • Based on public input tonight made the following comments:
52 ■ Related to copy of plan distribution, copies were made available to the Planning
53 Commission, City Council, City Traffic Engineering Committee, Paths, Open Space, and
54 Creeks Commission, Parks, Recreation and Golf Commission, a copy is available at City
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 11
1 Hall Administration Building, at the public library and is posted on the City of Ukiah
2 website. Extra copies of the plan can be made for distribution purposes.
3 • Emailed people he knew are familiar with trails/bicycle facilities. Good effort was made to
4 get the word to the public about the plan.
5 ■ Related to the possibility of the Rail Trail being extended from Raley's to Talmage, noted
6 our local community has worked with MCOG to formulate a Rail Trail Feasibility Plan
7 which shows the trail extending from Lake Mendocino Drive south through Ukiah so this
8 plan is in the works. As noted above since preparing this plan, the City has received
9 funding for Phase 2 of the Rail Trail that will extend the trail from Gobbi Street to
10 Commerce Drive.
11 ■ Creating a walking path to Riverside Park is a consideration that would require
12 coordination with the County of Mendocino.
13 • ADA compliant ramps are being implemented. There have been two major sidewalk
14 projects, one on Mendocino Drive along the Yokayo Elementary School frontage and
15 another along the sidewalk frontage at the Fairgrounds.
16 ■ Since the previous Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was adopted, striped bicycle
17 lanes have been installed on Gobbi Street from Orchard Avenue to Oak Manor Drive with
18 an additional bike trail established at Oak Manor Park and more the recently completed
19 Phase 1 NWP Rail Trail from Clara Avenue to Gobbi Street.
20 ■ The Streetscape Improvement project on State Street is non-contradictory to the Bicycle
21 and Pedestrian Master Plan. The Streetscape Improvement project is discussed in the
22 plan document.
23 ■ One of the people reasons walk in the street is there is a lot of shrubbery along sidewalks
24 that impede travel. It is the property owner's responsibility to trim/prune shrubbery along
25 sidewalks although City public works street crew will also assist in this regard, if
26 necessary.
27 ■ Related to the concern about diagonal parking with the Streetscape project confirmed
28 there will be no diagonal parking on State Street.
29 ■ Likes the idea of providing a tree canopy along the new section of the Rail Trail, but must
30 comply with Caltrans standards as it relates to physical clearance from the edge of the
31 trail to any obstructions. The number of trees that could be planted would have to be
32 determined based on necessary spacing.
33 ■ Would be happy to come back to the Planning Commission for another meeting
34 concerning the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that would include a PowerPoint
35 presentation.
36
37 Commissioner Watt:
38 • Is there outreach and education components related to bicycle safety and traffic laws with the
39 community schools integrated into the plan?
40
41 Commissioner Sanders:
42 • The educational programs talked about in the plan do include collaboration with the County in this
43 regard.
44
45 Deputy Director Public Works Seanor:
46 • Referred to pages 71 through 73 of the plan and confirmed outreach and education programs
47 related to bicycle safety and traffic laws in connection with community schools are addressed in
48 the plan and in the community via the Bicycle and Safety Commission.
49 • Confirmed educational programs do include County agencies, such as the County Public Health
50 Department.
51
52 Commission Consensus:
53 • Would like for the Planning Commission to revisit the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan with
54 more clarification and public notification.
55
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 12
1 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
2 Principal Planner Thompson:
3 • A Wagenseller park feasibility workshop will be conducted on February 4, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the
4 City Council Chambers.
5
6 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
7
8 12. ADJOURNMENT
9 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
10
11
12 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 27, 2016
Page 13
CITY OF UKIAH
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 24, 2016
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works �
SUBJECT: Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
At the January 27, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, staff presented the Ukiah Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan (Plan)for comment. Several members of the public attended
the meeting and provided comment. The Planning Commission requested that review of
the Plan be continued to a future meeting. Specifically requested were the following: a
Power Point presentation, more detail on the plan, and more public notification.
Public Notification Process: Copies of the Plan have been available for public review
since January 12, 2016 at Ukiah Civic Center, the Ukiah Regional Library, and on the City's
website. Staff posted the public review notification to the City of Ukiah Facebook page on
January 15, 2016. Copies of the Plan were placed at Dave's Bike Shop and at Pacific
Outfitters on January 29, 2016. Flyers to provide information to the public on how to
provide comments have been placed at the Ukiah Civic Center, Dave's Bike Shop, and at
Pacific Outfitters. The Plan at the Library has a page with instructions on how to provide
comments. The Plan was presented to the Traffic Engineering Committee on January 12,
2016. Comments on the Plan were received at the Traffic Engineering Committee at its
February 9, 2016 meeting. The Plan was presented to the Paths, Open Space, and
Creeks Commission at its January 12, 2016 meeting. Comments on the Plan were
received at their February 9, 2016 meeting. The Plan is scheduled to be presented to the
Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission for comments at their February 23, 2016 meeting.
In addition, articles on the Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan have been published
at the top of the front page of the Ukiah Daily Journal on two dates: January 27, 2016 and
on February 10, 2016.
Recommended Action: Staff will review a Power Point presentation at tonight's Planning
Commission meeting. Additional comments from the public and final comments from the
Planning Commission are requested.
Page 2
Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan—Planning Commission Memorandum
February 24,2016
Public Review and Input: The Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is available for
public review from January 12 through February 29, 2016 and is available online on the
City's website at http://www.citvofukiah.com/streets/ or at the Public Works information
counter at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah. Comments on the plan
may be submitted in writing to Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works, Ukiah Civic
Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400, or by fax at: 707-463-6204, or by
email at: rseanor(c.�citvofukiah.com
More Information: For more information, contact Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public
Works — rseanor _citvofukiah.com / 707-463-6296.
cc: file