HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_01132016 - Final 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 exempts such business from having to comply with newly adopted zoning
41 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