HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_03232016 - Final 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 March 23, 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 Charley Stump, Planning Director 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 February 24, 2016 meeting are included for
26 review and approval.
27
28 M/S Sanders/Christensen to approve February 24, 2016 minutes, as submitted with Commissioner Watt
29 abstaining.
30
31 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
32
33 6. APPEAL PROCESS
34 Chair Whetzel read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting the final date to appeal is April
35 4, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.
36
37 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION - Confirmed by Commissioners.
38
39 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE-Confirmed by Staff.
40
41 9. PUBLIC PRESENTATION
42 9A. Public Workshop; Alternative Fuels Readiness Project Presented by Juliette Bohn of JPB
43 Consulting.
44
45 Juliette Bohn, Juliette Bohn Consulting:
46 • Gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding a Northwest California Alternative Fuels Readiness
47 project as provided for in attachment 1 of the minutes that specifically outlines the program
48 purpose and intent with regard to the use of alternative fuels in an effort to provide for clean and
49 sustainable fuels to facilitate a more secure energy future. The fuels under consideration are:
50 electricity, natural gas and propane, hydrogen and biofuels such as biodiesel and biogas.
51 • The aforementioned program is being developed for the counties of Del Norte, Siskiyou,
52 Humboldt, Trinity and Mendocino.
53 • The project partners represents a cooperative effort between Redwood Coast Energy Authority,
54 the Schatz Energy Research Center at Humboldt State University, the Mendocino Council of
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 1
1 Governments (MCOG), the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District, and the
2 Siskiyou County Economic Development Council where funding is provided by the California
3 Energy Commission under a grant.
4 • For informational purposes referenced the following sources from the U S Department of Energy:
5 1) Clean Cities Guide to Alternative Fuel and Advanced (Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles); 2)
6 Clean Cities 2016 Vehicle Buyer's Guide; The contact agency for these sources is: Schatz
7 Energy Research Center, Humboldt State University, Jerome Carman, Research Engineer; and,
8 3) California lncentive Available to the North State Region written by the U S Department of
9 Energy, Alternative Fuels Data Center, www.afdc.emerqu.qov/laws/all?state=CA).
10 • The State of California has established goals and policies for adopting alternative fuels through
11 the State Alternative Fuels Plan (AB1007) where the intent under State policy is to transition
12 away from petroleum consumption via AB 1076 and the `Reducing California's Petroleum
13 Dependence plan,' reduce greenhouse gas emission through AB 32 and adoption of the low
14 carbon fuel standard, increase in-state biofuel production and use through the Bioenergy Action
15 Plan for California and improve air quality through state mandates set by the California Air
16 Resources Board.
17 • Fuels that are cleaner than gasoline or diesel can be sourced within the United State and in our
18 region.
19 • Alternative fuel outreach materials and strategies that include program incentives, regulations,
20 funding opportunities and other initiatives related to alternative fuels, advanced technologies or
21 air quality are created to assist project stakeholders and/or other interested program
22 persons/agencies/organizations/governments/vehicle manufacturers/dealers/fleet operators/fuel
23 producers and distributors.
24 • Related to the rules/regulations for the transportation sector, the emphasis is on the use of low-
25 emission fuels in connection with the low carbon fuel standard which requires fuel suppliers to
26 reduce the carbon intensity for California by 10°/a by the year 2020. This presents the opportunity
27 to manufacture low carbon emission fuels, locally and talked about incentives programs.
28 • Another regulation that can have a local impact is the California Building Code where the 2016
29 update requires all new buildings install electrical vehicle charging stations depending upon the
30 number of parking spaces required for the development and/or can accommodate.
31 • There are also State requirements geared toward reducing the use of petroleum by 20% that
32 stipulate all vehicle manufacturers by the year 2025, 20% of all vehicles for sale in California must
33 adhere to 'zero carbon emission vehicle.' As such, the future of transportation in all parts of
34 California will be characterized by low emission fuels and higher performing vehicle technologies.
35 • Planning for low emission fuels has essentially been going on since the 1970s nationwide both
36 state and federally.
37 • Talked about aging fleets and conversions to low carbon emissions and incentives with regard to
38 purchase vouchers provided by the California Air Resources Board to eligible fleets as specifically
39 addressed in the `California lncentive Available to the North State Region' informational
40 document.
41 • Welcomes comments/questions from the Commission.
42
43 Commissioner Sanders:
44 • Asked what company(s) Ms. Bohn represents?
45 • Related to attachment 1 of the minutes, section 'Promote Economic Development,' second bullet
46 'Encourages the use of locally processed fuels,' and asked about potential sites where alternative
47 fuels would be processed and what fuel types the alternative fuel coalition has encountered. Are
48 there plans to cite facilities that could accommodate the production of alternative fuels in
49 Mendocino County?
50 • Requested clarification `electric' is the primarily alternative fuel type being looked at for
51 Mendocino County?
52 • Related to the statement in attachment 1 that reads, `The Northwest California Alternative Fuels
53 readiness project promotes State goals by assessing the opportunity to commercialize and adopt
54 low carbon fuels in the unique setting of the Northwest Region. The project also integrates local
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 2
1 needs and challenges into a strategic planning and outreach effort that effectively enhances the
2 adoption of alternative fuels' and asked what are the local needs and challenges?
3
4 Commissioner Watt:
5 • Asked about the concept of renewable diesel and distinguish from biodiesel. Requested
6 clarification renewable diesel has a different chemical make-up than biodiesel.
7
8 Juliette Bohn:
9 • She represents the Redwood Coast Energy Authority and Schatz Energy research Center both of
10 which are non-profit organizations.
11 • The type of fuel that likely speaks the most locally is electricity in the form of solar panels and/or
12 energy generation that produces energy via roof tops of buildings, etc. Supports that electricity
13 comes from `clean' energy. While hydrogen is thought more of in the future it can be produced
14 anywhere. Other fuels such as biofuels would likely be produced elsewhere in the State of
15 California. Some fuel types will be brought here and some can be produced locally. Alcohol
16 producing fuel can be made locally. Anything having to do with waste oils is another option of a
17 fuel type that can be produced locally. Mendocino County will have a zero emissions vehicle
18 readiness plan that has been developed and MCOG is the lead agency in this regard. Likewise,
19 other counties in this region have a similar plan. The objective is to develop a networking of
20 electric vehicle charging stations throughout northwest California so that people with electric
21 vehicles can travel in this region knowing there are charging stations available. The readiness
22 plan would also include a network system to develop other fuel types in this region.
23 • Acknowledged electricity offers a tremendous carbon emissions benefit. The State of California
24 has a goal to increase the quantity of electric vehicles operating on streets by the year 2040 and
25 this is the reason it is important to increase the number of electric vehicle charging facilities.
26 • Related to local needs and challenges, it is important to meet and appropriately train emergency
27 responders, mechanics, and fleet operators and to specifically ask about their individual needs for
28 operational purposes.
29 Renewable diesel is a new concept. Hydrogenation-derived renewable diesel is the product of
30 fats or vegetable oils alone or blended with petroleum (also known as green diesel)that is refined
31 by a hydro-treating process. The primary distinction between renewable diesel and biodiesel is
32 that renewable diesel does not have the issues that biodiesel has even though it is made from
33 some of the same products and explained how so on an accountable level. Renewable diesel is
34 not the same thing as biodiesel. Renewable diesel is chemically the same as petrodiesel but is
35 made of recently living biomass. While renewable diesel and biodiesel differ on a chemical level
36 from performance standpoint renewable diesel is a much easier fuel to work with and works well
37 with existing infrastructure. Renewable diesel was only recently approved by the California Air
38 Resources Board as one of the low carbon pathways.
39
40 A great opportunity/advantage is that heavy duty fleet vehicles are diesel vehicles so if a
41 community wanted to reduce their carbon emissions they could engage in the use of renewable
42 diesel fuel. Currently California has mandated that all state fleets involving bulk and diesel
43 purchases have to use `renewable' diesel. The opportunity exists to take advantage of`renewable
44 diesel' and lower carbon emissions.
45
46 Biodiesel is produced using a chemically different process from petrodiesel and renewable diesel.
47 Biodiesel is considered a `renewable' option for diesel vehicles and is economically a viable
48 alternative to conventional diesel. It can be produced from new and used vegetable oils, animal
49 fats and recycled restaurant grease and when used in place of diesel, can significantly reduce life
50 cycle carbon emissions. Related to performance, biodiesel fuel can use different blends that
51 consist of biodiesel and diesel fuel. Pure biodiesel must be produced to an established
52 specification to ensure efficient performance. The great thing about biodiesel is it meets the
53 petroleum diesel 'ASTM' standards for diesel fuel and performance-wise you cannot tell the
54 difference between regular diesel and biodiesel. Biodiesel has a lower emissions profile because
55 it is made from plants that are part of the short-term carbon cycle. Biodiesel is available today to
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 3
1 reduce carbon emissions without having to change vehicles or putting in a new fuel infrastructure
2 to accommodate this fuel type.
3
4 Biofuel such as biodiesel and biogas is a fuel that is produced through contemporary biological
5 processes from living organisms or from metabolic by-products rather than a fuel produced by
6 geological processes such as those involved in the formation of fossil fuels, such as coal and
7 petroleum. The two most common types of biofuels in use today are ethanol and biodiesel.
8 Biogas refers to a mixture of different gases produced from raw materials such as agricultural
9 waste, manure, municipal waste, plant material, sewage, green waste or food waste.
10
11 Commissioner Christensen:
12 • How do the electric charging stations compare to other fuel alternatives as it relates to use of
13 'clean'fuel?
14
15 Commissioner Hilliker:
16 • Related to the use of alternative fuels, his preference is diesel fuel. While he has not read all the
17 literature from vehicle manufacturers regarding alternative fuels understands they frown on
18 biofuels. Will vehicle manufacturer warranty cover this fuel type (biodiesel)?
19
20 Juliette Bohn :
21 • While Ukiah has its own power grid is not sure of the source in terms of producing `clean' fuel.
22 Has knowledge PG&E has one of the `cleanesY grids in the country. It has a lot of hydro and
23 natural gas. The north coast has a clean electricity grid mix so the resulting emissions benefit is
24 very real unlike in other parts of the country where coal is used exclusively or in the mix to
25 produce electricity.
26 • Acknowledged biodiesel meets the `ASTM' diesel fuel standards used in these engine types.
27 Diesel engines do not recognize the difference between `diesel' or `biodiesel' fuel. The
28 performance is the same and referred to the U S Department of Energy Clean Cities 2016
29 Vehicle Buyer's Guide and Clean Cities Guide to Alternative Fuel and Advanced Medium and
30 Heavy Duty Vehicles that address the specifications necessary for vehicles on the market today
31 as well information on aging fleet.
32 • Would like to see biodiesel fuel sold at local gas stations.
33
34 The Commission thanked Juliette for the information regarding the use alternative fuels in connection with
35 the goal of developing low carbon fuel standards.
36
37 10A. The Sandbox Use Permit, 270 N. Pine Street(File No.: 1612-UP-PC). Consideration and possible
38 action on a request for approval of a Major Use Permit to allow a Child Care Center at 270 N.
39 Pine Street, APN 002-214-07.
40
41 Assistant Planner Johnson:
42 • Presented a staff report as provided for in pages 1-7 of the staff report and corresponding
43 attachments 1-6.
44 • The Minutes from the regular July 28, 2010 Planning Commission meeting are included as
45 attachment 2 of the minutes for reference purposes regarding a similar childcare center in the
46 same location.
47 • Referenced further comments/recommendations in an email dated March 16, 2016 from Sean
48 Kaeser and Nancy Sawyer of the Ukiah Police Department that are included in the minutes as
49 attachment 3. This information is in addition to the comments submitted by the Ukiah Police
50 Department in attachment 5 of the staff report.
51 • Attachment 3 of the staff report contains a project a project description and operations manual
52 submitted by the applicant that explains in detail how the childcare center will operate.
53 • Of particular importance for discussion is the matter of egress and ingress into the facility. The
54 applicant has addressed this matter on page 10 of the operations manual including the policy of
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 4
1 parents not leaving children unattended in vehicles and that vehicles should not be left idling
2 during drop off/pickup.
3 • Addressed the parking requirements for the project and noted seven parking spaces will be
4 dedicated to the childcare center by the church.
5 • Staff recommends approval of the project based on the Findings in attachment 1 and subject to
6 the Conditions of Approval in attachment 2.
7
8 Commissioner Hilliker:
9 • Noted the church has an address of 270 N. Pine and the proposed childcare center has an
10 address of 205 N. Bush address and would like clarification in this regard because an address
11 discrepancy could be problematic for emergency responders. If the 270 N. Pine address is given
12 to emergency responders they will go to the church and not the childcare facility.
13
14 Commissioner Christensen:
15 • Questioned access to the child care facility.
16 • Requested clarification the building has mixed uses including a mental health facility.
17
18 Commissioner Watt:
19 • Referred to draft condition of approval no. 6 related to the outside play area and noise and
20 inquired as to the basis that play time will be limited to a total of three hours of play.
21 • Referred to attachment 2 of the minutes and it appears the issues for this childcare center in the
22 same location as the proposed project such as the need for installation of a fire alarm system
23 were adequately addressed.
24 • Referred to page 10 of the operations manual that calls for a map insert and asked if this map is
25 available.
26
27 Assistant Planner Johnson:
28 • Will review the addressing for the different uses on the site.
29 • Ukiah Police Department makes recommendations regarding access/entrances to the facility in
30 attachment 5 of the staff report. Concern was expressed that in the past there was unauthorized
31 access into the school building via the interior church doors that connect. As such, Nancy Sawyer
32 of UPD made the recommendation to secure interior doors. Sean Kaeser of UPD in his project
33 review had some concerns whether interior doors can be secured from a safety perspective. The
34 childcare facility formulated a plan for their south entrance where only the childcare families will
35 use the southwest entrance. All others will use the northwest entrance. Signs will be installed to
36 help with access. The church is considering putting in a push button entry system for the
37 northwest door that will limit entrance to only those with the code. In Attachment 3 of the minutes
38 UPD acknowledges the childcare facility's plan and is fine with the proposal provided planning
39 department is comfortable with the proposal and that it works on a safety level.
40 • Applicant can confirm the uses in the building.
41 • The three hours of play time is a standard condition of approval for childcare facilities because
42 such facilities are typically located in residential areas where the intent is to not only be fair and
43 reasonable to the applicant but also to the neighborhood.
44 • Applicant can address specific issues the Commission has questions about. The Fire Marshal
45 has reviewed the proposed project.
46 • The map insert is something the applicant will use to hand out to parents where such a map will
47 be included in the operations manual.
48
49 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:47 p.m.
50
51 Commissioner Watt:
52 • Did the change of occupancy issue for the former childcare facility get resolved?
53
54 Commissioner Sanders:
55 • Asked where the employees will park?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 5
1 • Related to the matter of circulation in the parking lot that was addressed in 2010 for the former
2 childcare facility and again in the operation manual for the proposed new childcare facility asked
3 how it is going to work in the parking lot.
4
5 Commissioner Christensen:
6 • Related to the 2010 childcare center, the minutes reflect a discussion about directional arrows on
7 the ground in the parking lot and asked whether this is part of the proposed project? She did not
8 see any directional arrows when she conducted her site visit.
9 • Would support directional signage in the parking lot as a project condition of approval. While this
10 was a condition of approval for the former childcare facility it was not specific about the signage
11 being located on asphalt. The condition requires directional signage at the entrance of the parking
12 lot that could be interpreted as signage on the ground or`a sign' in the parking lot. Would support
13 directional signage that is on the ground.
14
15 Commission:
16 • It may be that requiring directional arrows in the church parking lot should be made a project
17 condition of approval.
18
19 Ann Molgaard, First Five Mendocino:
20 • Confirmed the initial fire alarm system was installed and then recently reinstalled.
21 • Providing for directional arrows would make sense. A church representative has indicated the
22 parking lot would have to be restriped at some point.
23 • Would have no objection providing signage in the church parking lot in the form of directional
24 arrows on the ground as a condition of approval.
25
26 Director of the Sandbox Childcare Center:
27 • Confirmed the change of occupancy issue concerning the former childcare facility and the mental
28 health facility was resolved. The mental health facility has since relocated so the issue of
29 occupancy is no longer an issue.
30 • All parents or guardians must enter from Standley Street as noted by sign with arrow, park in
31 parking spaces and exit onto Smith Street. There will be a family orientation and intake training
32 concerning operation of the childcare center that will include parking lot etiquette and the location
33 of the designated parking spaces and the direction people should be travel when they enter and
34 exit the parking lot.
35 • Related to employee parking, she lives in the vicinity of the school and will bike or walk to work.
36 Other employees, visitors, etc., can take advantage of off-street parking accommodations.
37 • Would support providing for directional signage of some form in the parking lot.
38
39 Commissioner Hilliker:
40 • Related to safety asked about the exit doors being required to have an 'exit bar.' Would the
41 protective push bar be on the inside or outside of the doors? Sees in attachment 5 of the staff
42 report pertinent to Ukiah Police Department comments the recommendation regarding doors is to
43 make sure doors have the exit push bar protected from exterior tampering by a metal shield that
44 protects the push bar. It is not specified whether the protective push bar is located on the inside
45 or outside of the doors. The protective push bar should be on the inside of a door. Questions the
46 design of the protective exit push bar. The push bar needs to open and function properly at all
47 times and it is highly important entry/exit doors function correctly for all emergency situations.
48
49 Assistant Planner Johnson:
50 • Has no information regarding the location of the push bar.
51
52 Ann Molgaard:
53 • Has no knowledge about the function of the exit doors.
54
55 Planning Director Stump:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 6
1 • The Fire Marshal and City Building Official require that all doors/exit doors and/or other building
2 code-related functions meet code standards.
3
4 Commissioner Sanders:
5 • Asked about Commission consensus making the installation of directional signage in the church
6 parking lot a condition of approval. It does not appear the applicants view adding directional
7 signage in the parking lot as a problem.
8
9 Commissioner Watt:
10 • The operations manual states parents or guardians must enter from Standley Street noted by
11 sign with arrow, park in the designated parking spaces and exit onto Smith Street so it appears
12 the applicants intend to provide for signage in the parking lot.
13
14 Commissioner Hilliker:
15 • Related to the matter of installing direction arrows on the pavement of the parking lot there is an
16 issue of one-way streets (Standley Street and Smith Street) on either side of the building so
17 people heading westerly up the street on Smith Street will have to be formally advised how to
18 proceed if all parents or guardians must enter from Standley Street and exit onto Smith Street.
19
20 Gary Anderson, Ukiah Methodist Church representative:
21 • Would be a slight inconvenience to church members to change how the parking lot presently
22 operates and recommends leaving the issue of parking lot etiquette to the management of the
23 daycare center.
24 • Does not support requiring signage in the form of directional arrows in the parking lot as a project
25 condition of approval.
26
27 It was the consensus of the Commission not to condition the project to require directional signage for the
28 parking lot, but rather leave the parking lot etiquette to the management of the daycare facility as
29 specifically addressed in the operations manual.
30
31 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:05 p.m.
32
33 M/S Watt/Hilliker to approve The Sandbox Major Use Permit File No. 1612-UP-PC based on the
34 Findings in Attachment 1 and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Attachment 2. Motion carried (5-0).
35
36 11. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
37 Planning Director Stump:
38 • City Council recently heard an introduction to the Ukiah General Plan Housing Element with
39 recommended approval by the Planning Commission. The document will come back to Council
40 for final approval April 6.
41 • Council recently had the opportunity to review the LAFCO budget and had no comments.
42 • Related to the RFP concerning development of the City-owned property on N. Main Street
43 Council reviewed the responses and authorized the City Manager to enter into negotiations with
44 the firm that came in at the top of the bid.
45 • While there has been no recent Zoning Administrator action, two projects are scheduled for
46 March 31St and they include a minor variance on Joseph Street and a minor site development
47 permit for an accessory structure at Ellie's Mutt Hut.
48 • The Planning Commission will be reviewing two zoning code amendments in the near future.
49 • Staff will be looking at updating the Ukiah General Plan. The plan is now 20 years old.
50 • The Costco project is waiting review and a decision by the U S Appellate Court in San Francisco.
51 • The Talmage Road Realignment project is moving forward.
52 • Mediation concerning the Palace Hotel is continuing.
53 • The Wagenseller Parks Site Identification Study will move forward with the community's help.
54 • Council will review the fee schedules for the Planning and Building Department and possibly
55 make some revisions.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 7
1 • The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review a draft Marijuana Dispensary
2 Ordinance and provide comments to City Council. There have been some State law changes in
3 this regard.
4 • Possible development interest has been expressed concerning vacant parcels in the AIP as well
5 as other vacant parcels in the City limits.
6 • Has submitted a draft Planning/Building budget for next year that includes a stipend and training
7 budget for the Planning Commissioners.
8
9 Commissioner Watt:
10 • Asked about the name of the firm the City is negotiating with for development of the City-owned
11 development on N. Main Street.
12
13 Planning Director Stump:
14 • Guillon Inc. is the firm the City is negotiating with concerning potential development of the City-
15 owned property on N. Main Street.
16
17 Commissioner Sanders:
18 • Attended the recent Wagenseller Neighborhood meeting where development of a potential park
19 for this neighborhood was on the agenda and inquired about the date for the next community
20 meeting.
21
22 Planning Director Stump:
23 • The date for the next Wagenseller Neighborhood meeting concerning a potential park has not yet
24 been selected.
25
26 Chair Whetrel:
27 • Thanked Assistant Planner Johnson for doing a nice job on tonighYs project presentation.
28
29 12. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
30
31 13. ADJOURNMENT
32 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:23 p.m.
33
34
35 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
36
37
38
39 FINAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
40 THE OPERATION OF A CHILD CARE CENTER
41 AT 270 NORTH PINE STREET, APN 002-214-07
42 FILE NO: 1612-UP-PC
43
44 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
45 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
46
47 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
48 Plan as described in the staff report.
49 2. The proposed project, as conditioned and with an approved Use Permit pursuant to Zoning
50 Ordinance Section 9262 and per Section 9198 (E)(1) off- street parking requirements, is
51 consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in the staff report.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 8
1 3. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in regards to parking in
2 that:
3 A. The project site has a paved on-site parking lot that contains nineteen (19) stall paved
4 parking spaces. Staff has included a condition of approval requiring 7 parking spaces be
5 dedicated to The Sandbox Children' Play School by the Church. Therefore, the impact to the
6 neighborhood in terms of on—street parking will be minimal.
7 B. The proposed project will not conflict in terms of operating days and hours with other
8 activities scheduled at the church therefore there will be ample parking on site.
9 C. The childcare center will be licensed for 36 children the nature of a child care center is that
10 not all of the children are dropped off at the same time resulting in staggered parking needs
11 throughout the day. Therefore, the 7 designated parking spaces will be sufficient.
12 4. The proposed project is compatible with surrounding neighborhood in regards to traffic in that:
13 A. Given the operation of the childcare center will not conflict in terms of days and hours with
14 other church functions, the adjacent neighborhood will not experience an increase in traffic.
15 B. The childcare center will be licensed for 36 children; the nature of a childcare center is not all
16 of the children are dropped off or picked up at the same time. Therefore, there will not be a
17 dramatic increase in traffic to the neighborhood.
18 C. Given the project site is located in a transition area, surrounded by both residential and
19 commercial uses, the childcare center will be available to residents and working families in
20 the neighborhood who can walk to the center. Furthermore, the center is located in close
21 proximity to public transit.
22 5. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in regards to noise in that
23 :
24 A. The proposed use will be held to the City standard noise requirements as defined in the City
25 Municipal Code; therefore, the adjacent neighborhood will not be impacted with increased
26 noise levels.
27 B. The surrounding neighborhood is a mix of residential and commercial uses. Based on the
28 perFormance of past childcare facilities at this location and the fact there have not been
29 complaints from the neighbors in the past, the proposed use is compatible with the
30 neighborhood.
31 6. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare in
32 that :
33 A. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building Official,
34 Public Works and comments received have been included as conditions of approval.
35 B. The Childcare Facility will be licensed by the State of California through the Community Care
36 Licensing Board.
37 C. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws. The applicant has
38 provided information as to compliance with applicable requirements.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 9
1 D. Based on findings 3, 4, and 5 above.
2 7. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
3 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (c), New Construction and Conversion of Small Structures,
4 which allows structures up to 10,000 square feet in urbanized areas when the use does not
5 involve significant amounts of hazardous materials, where all necessary public services and
6 facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive based on the
7 following:
8
9 A. The proposed project includes 1,516 square feet of classroom area.
10
11 B. The Childcare Center use does not involve the use of hazardous materials.
12
13 C. The project site is located in an area where all public services and facilities area available.
14
15 D. The project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area in that the site is located in
16 an developed urban area. The site is developed with buildings, parking lot, landscaping and a
17 play yard. No water courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat, floodway or flood plain or other
18 environmentally sensitive areas are present.
19 E. The proposed project will not conflict in terms of operating days and hours with other
20 activities scheduled at the church site; therefore, the on-site parking shall be sufficient and
21 not impact the neighborhood. Furthermore, the drop-off and pick-up times will be staggered
22 throughout the day resulting in less impact on the neighborhood.
23 F. Given the operation of the childcare center will not conflict in terms of days and hours with
24 other church functions the adjacent neighborhood will not be adversely impacted by
25 increased traffic.
26 G. The proposed use will be held to the City Standard Noise requirements as defined in
27 the City Municipal Code therefore the adjacent neighborhood will not be impacted with
28 increased noise levels.
29 8. Notice of the proposed project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
30 Ordinance:
31 A. posted in three places on the project site on March 09, 2016;
32 B. mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on March 09, 2016; and
33 C. published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on March 13, 2016.
34
35 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—USE PERMIT
36
37 DRAFT USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
38 THE OPERATION OF A CHILD CARE CENTER
39 AT 270 NORTH PINE STREET, APN 002-214-07
40 FILE NO: 1612-UP-PC
41
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 10
1 1. Approval is granted for the operation of a childcare center as described in the project descriptions
2 submitted to the Community Development and Planning Department and date stamped March
3 04, 2016 except as modified by the following conditions of approval.
4 2. This Use Permit is granted subject to the following hours of operation:
5 ■ Monday through Friday 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM
6
7 ■ Once a month Parent Education Meeting 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
8 The parent education meetings shall not be scheduled at a time and day that conflict with other
9 scheduled events at the Church
10
11 3. Provide revised site plan identifying 7 parking spaces to be dedicated to The Sandbox Children'
12 Play School by the Church.
13 4. The childcare center is limited to a maximum of 36 children.
14 5. The drop-off and pick pick- up times for the children shall be staggered as noted in the project
15 description submitted by the applicant.
16
17 6. Noise generated from the childcare center and outside play yard shall not exceed the established
18 noise standards as defined by the City's Municipal Code. Outside play time will be limited to a
19 total of three hours per day.
20 From the Police Department( Sean Kaeser)
21
22 7. As a condition of the Use Permit if granted that the Applicant will obtain and show proof by filing a
23 copy with the City of their appropriate State of California Daycare License and maintain a valid
24 license for operation for the duration of operation.
25 Standard Citv Conditions of Approval
26
27 8. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
28 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
29 and issued/finaled.
30 9. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
31 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
32 10. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
33 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
34 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
35 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
36 and issued.
37 11. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
38 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
39 12. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
40 to building permit final.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 11
1 13. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
2 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
3 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
4 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
5 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
6 14. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
7 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
8 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
9 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
10 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
11 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
12 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
13 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
14 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
15 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
16 remain in full force and effect.
17
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION March 23, 2016
Page 12
�.�-?�chm�nt # ��__
�. � �_�
f ;�
. . =�:: u e s
�.
� � � .�
� :.�� . : . �� �... ___ _ __ _
,_� {
`�, , � _ - .�; �:, � � .�,-�, ... r.v :�_�r:y,-„ , . �. • _
. �; . . ��e-�din`es�s� �P�ro- e�t
_ _ _ . _ J
�-�++':-: t,:; �..f. _ �._.'
z. _ ,�. , , �� - ,:
� � � • �_
_K} y��'� ■ ....,1 Y..�2 .. ~ .
. . y} � 1 ; f � t~� .
� �� �� �+ . . �,y���`
� s ;:
�`��' � �.
:3�7.i. ��+ . -��
- - '_3.
The Northwest California Alternative Fuels Readiness Project is developing a readiness plan for
the counties of Del Norte, Siskiyou, Humboldt, Trinity, and Mendocino.
Focus on the Future
• Create a roadmap for wise and effective altemative fuel infrastructure deployment.
• Identify activities that encourage regional altemative fuel vehicle adoption.
• Coordinate regional efforts that support the successful introduction of altemative fuel vehicles.
• Highlight training and first responder needs for safe deployment and adoption.
• Facilitate robust market development for alternative fuels.
Promote Economic Develapment
To address multiple barriers to alternative transportation fuel adoption in the region,this project:
• Promotes the need for alternative fuel infrastructure;
• Encourages the use of locally processed fuels;
• Informs consumers about alternative fuels;
• Addresses permitting and regulatory hurdles with local and regional govemment agencies;
• Engages local and regional fleets about alternative fuel conversion opportunities.
Project Partners
The is a cooperative effort between the Redwood Coast Energy Authority,the Schatz Energy Research Center
at Humboldt State University,the Mendocino Council of Govemments,the North Coast Unified Air Quality
Management District, and the Siskiyou County Economic Development Council. Funding is provided by the
Califomia Energy Commission under grant number ARV-13-012.
N�. �--.`
.•• ,
� ►' Schaiz Energy Resm¢h Center �_���� ,f'� ���
�
._ � �� �� � � �=��..
�` '^' �� S E R� ����_5 � � S15KIYOU COUNTY
' ��• MCOG ECONbMIC DEVELOPMENT
�!�.�
Change Nlore Than Just the Car You Dri►►�
7hrough accelerated commercialization of altemative and
renewable fuels,this project not only ensures the region meets its
share of the State's low carbon fuel standard, but also improves air
quality, encourages energy sustainability, and improves regional
resilience to natural disasters.
A�ign Wi�th State Gva1S
The State of Califomia has set ambitious goals for adopting altemative fuels.Through the State Altemative
Fuels Plan(AB 1007), current State policy is to:
• Transition away from petroleum consumption via AB 1076 and the Reducing California's Petroleum
Dependence plan;
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions through AB 32 and adoption of the low carbon fuel standard;
• Increase in-state biofuel production and use through the Bioenergy Action Plan for Calrfornia;
,• Improve air quality through state mandates set by the California Air Resources Board.
• • Clean, Sustainable, and Secure
� � � ' Fuels that are cleaner than gasoline or diesel can be sourced within the
� ' ' • • • United States, and in our region,to facilitate a more secure energy
• ' '••� future. Fuels under consideration are electricity, natural gas and
•• propane, hydrogen, and biofuels such as biodiesel and biogas.
. .
. . - .
• • • Project Stakeholder Input Is Needed
' Numerous stakeholders will have a voice in this project, including:
� � � � • Local governments • Fleet operators
• Fuel producers and distributors • Auto dealers
�� � � � • Emergency responders • Many others
`1'O�� `1,0�� ,LO��o
Stakehvtder�]utreach Time�ine
• Assess alternative fuel infrastructure and deployment options(including April 2014-August 2015
an assessment of planning, permitting and deployment challenges)
• Analyze and recommend incentives to increase alternative fuel adoption May 2014-June 2015
• Develop strategic plan for altemative fuel market development August 2014-June 2015
• Cooperatively develop training materials for infrastructure owners, May 2015-November 2015
operators, managers, and emergency response teams
• Create outreach materials and strategies to communicate altemative July 2015- December 2015
fuel benefits
• Develop and finalize a regional readiness plan July 2015 -October 2015
LEGAL NOTICE:This document was prepared as a result of work sponsored by the Califomia Energy Commission.It does not necessarily
represent the views of the Energy Commission,its employees,or the State of Califomia.The Commission,the State of Califomia,its
employees,contractors,and subcontractors make no warranty,express or implied,and assume no legal liability for the information in this
document;nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infinge upon privately owned rights.
• ''� 633 3ro Street, Eureka, CA 95501
REDVIIOOD COAST � P: 707.269.1700 F: 707.269.1777
'� �► En�r yAuthori info@redwoodenergy.org
• � � www.RedwoodEnergy.org
A�achm::nt # � .^
1 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 July 28, 2010
3 Minutes
4
5 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
6 Judy Pruden, Chair Linda Sanders
7 Anne Molgaard, Vice Chair
8 Linda Helland
9 Mike Whetzel
10
11 STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT
12 Kim Jordan, Senior Planner Listed below, Respectively
13 Jennifer Faso, Associate Planner
14 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
15
16 1. CALL TO ORDER
17 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by
18 Chair Pruden at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue,
19 Ukiah, California.
20
21 2. ROLL CALL
22
23 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -Everyone cited.
24
25 4. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION -Site verification was confirmed.
26
27 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—July 14, 2010
28 M/S Molgaard/Helland to approve July 14,2010 minutes as submitted. Motion carried(4-0).
29
30 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS-None
31
32 7. APPEAL PROCESS—Chair Pruden read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting,
33 the final day to appeal is August 9, 2010.
34
35 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE - Use Permit No. 10-11 was properly noticed in accordance with the
36 provisions of the UMC.
37
38 9. PUBLIC NOTICE
39 9A. Curious Minds Learning Center Use Permit No 10-11-UP-PC. Conduct a public hearing on
40 request from Tanyjasu Simms for approval of a child care center for 38 children to be located at
41 270 North Pine Street, APN 002-214-07.
42
43 Staff presented a staff report.
44
45 Tanyjsau Simms, applicant provided a brief overview of the proposed child care center and welcomed
46 questions from the Commission.
47
48 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:11 p.m.
49
50 Commission:
51 Q1. Does the applicant intend to complete a circulation plan for the parking lot? Has
52 consideration be given about one-way circulation through the parking lot with egress via
53 Smith Street and ingress via Standley Street or vice versa depending upon the direction a
54 particular person is coming from.
55 Q2. Will the clientele be notified about circulation in the parking lot?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 1
1 Q3. Will there be a designated drop-off area?Concerned was expressed that cars could be
2 left idling creating potential pollution and noise impacts to the neighborhood.
3 Q4. Referred to page 11, draft Conditions of Approval No. 2, line 19, Once a month Parent
4 Education meeting, and inquired whether this condition should state 'twice' a month
5 parent meeting.
6 Q5. Is caring for 38 children that will occupy three of the existing classrooms the maximum
7 allowed?
8
9 Tanyjsau Simms:
10 Q1. Preference would be one-way traffic through the parking lot with the entrance to the
11 center via Standley Street and exit via Smith Street.
12 Q2. Confirm the clientele for the facility will be notified.
13 Q3. Clients will enter the facility at the southern-most door. Every client must sign in and sign
14 out, as required by law. Additionally, parents will be notified prior to enrollment that the
15 operational policy for the facility requests other children that will not be attending the
16 facility must also come in while the parents are signing in their child/children. Parents are
17 asked to park their cars prior to entering the building as opposed to leaving them to idle.
18 It will likely take less than 10 minutes to sign in a child.
19 Q4. Conducting a parent education meeting once a month should be sufficient.
20 Q5. To comply with State Title 22 licensing requirements, the maximum number of children
21 allowed is based on square footage.
22
23 Commission:
24 • Recommends for safety reasons, the project be conditioned with the entrance on
25 Standley Street and the exit on Smith Street.
26 • Recommends a sign with an arrow be posted at the driveway entrance or painted on the
27 ground to effectively advise the clientele of the one-way circulation plan for the parking
28 lot.
29 • Playground noise should not be problematic in this neighborhood.
30 • One particular daycare facility in a church located in a residential area was cited as an
31 example of a facility that did not work well because of noise and other nuisance impacts
32 that occurred to the neighborhood particularly during the early morning hours.
33 • The proposed project is in a good location and its operation should not impact the
34 neighborhood.
35 • Supports conditioning the project that parent education meetings can be held twice a
36 month if necessary for flexibility purposes.
37
38 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:20 p.m.
39
40 Commission preference:
41 • Stipulate the circulation in the parking lot for the child care use by conditioning the project
42 to require a small sign be posted indicating entrance to the facility would be from
43 Standley Street and exit would be onto Smith Street.
44
45 PUBLIC HEARING Re-OPENED: 6:22 p.m.
46
47 Paul C. Holden, Representative of the Church: Addressed circulation in the parking lot and the
48 Commission's preference to have one-way directional flow of traffic in the parking lot for the day care
49 center use. There have been other day care facilities that operated in the Church facility over the years
50 and parking was never an issue. Clientele typically entered the parking lot from Standley Street and
51 exited onto Smith Street.
52
53 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:25 p.m.
54
55 PUBLIC HEARING RE-OPENED: 6:26 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28,2010
Page 2
1
2 Don Larson: Likes to park his car on the street as opposed to a parking lot. He suggests the clientele
3 with this preference park on Bush Street.
4
5 Chair Pruden: Public parking is available on Bush Street, but parking on the street for the clientele would
6 be problematic when dropping off and picking up children.
7
8 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:34 p.m.
9
10 Staff: Recommends adding conditions 'From the Planning Commission' to address signage to the
11 entrance of the parking lot and potential noise and air quality impacts from idling vehicles and modify
12 Condition of Approval No. 2 pertinent to hours of operation as it pertains to the number of monthly
13 meetings.
14
15 Commissioner Molgaard: Asked about the likelihood of painting a crosswalk at one or both of the
16 intersections at Bush Street and Standley Street or Bush Street and Smith Street to access the facility
17 from Bush Street.
18
19 It was noted this type of request must be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineering Committee.
20
21 Commissioner Helland: Advised the pedestrian always has the right-of-way in California at intersections
22 even if they are unmarked.
23
24 Commission consensus:
25 • Likes the project and the location.
26 • Modify Condition of Approval No. 2-Parent Education Meeting to allow two(2)
27 Parent Education Meeting, 6:00 p.m.to 8:00 p.m.
28 • Add Condition to require a directional sign/arrow at the parking lot entrance on Standley
29 Street to create one-way traffic circulation with exit on Smith Street.
30 • Add Condition to prohibit idling of cars; Clients must park and sign in child/children.
31
32 M/S Molgaard/Helland to approve Major Use Permit 10-11-UP-PC for Curious Minds Leaming Center
33 with Findings 1-8 and Conditions of Approval 1-18 with the changes/additions to the conditions as
34 referenced and discussed above. Motion carried. (4-0).
35
36 USE PERMIT FINDINGS TO ALLOW
37 THE OPERATION OF A CHILD CARE CENTER
38 AT 270 NORTH PINE STREET,APN 002-214-07
39 FILE NO: 10-11-UP-PC
40
41 The following findings are supported by and based on information contained in this staff report, the
42 application materials and documentation, and the public record.
43
44 1. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General
45 Plan as described in the staff report.
46
47 2. The proposed project, as conditioned and with an approved Use Permit pursuant to Zoning
48 Ordinance Section 9262 and per Section 9198 (E)(1) off- street parking requirements, is
49 consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in the staff report.
50
51 3. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in regards to parking in
52 that:
53
54 A. The project site has a paved on site parking lot that contains nineteen (19) parking spaces.
55 Seven (7) parking spaces are required and eight (8) spaces have been designated by the
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 3
1 Church specifically for this use. Therefore the impact to the neighborhood in terms of on —
2 street parking will be minimal.
3
4 B. The proposed project will not conflict in terms of operating days and hour with other activities
5 scheduled at the church therefore there will be ample parking on site.
6
7 C. The child care center will be licensed for 38 children the nature of a child care center is that
8 not all of the children are dropped off at the same time resulting in staggered parking needs
9 throughout the day. Therefore the 8 designated parking spaces will be sufficient.
10
11 4. The proposed project is compatible with surrounding neighborhood in regards to traffic in that:
12
13 A. Given that the operation of the child care center will not conflict in terms of days and hours
14 with other church functions the adjacent neighborhood will not experience an increase in
15 traffic.
16
17 B. The child care center will be licensed for 38 children, the nature of a child care center is that
18 not all of the children are dropped off or picked up at the same time. Therefore there will not
19 be an dramatic increase in traffic to the neighborhood.
20
21 C. Given that the project site is located in a transition area, surrounded by both residential and
22 commercial uses, the child care center will be available to residents and working families in
23 the neighborhood who can walk to the center. Furthermore the center is located in close
24 proximity to public transit.
25
26 5. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in regards to noise in that
27 .
28
29 A. The proposed use will be held to the City standard noise requirements as defined in the City
30 Municipal Code therefore the adjacent neighborhood will not be impacted with increased
31 noise levels.
32
33 B. The surrounding neighborhood is a mix of residential and commercial uses. Based on the
34 performance of past child care facilities at this location and the fact that there have not been
35 complaints from the neighbors in the past therefore the proposed use is compatible with the
36 neighborhood.
37
38 6. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare in
39 that:
40
41 A. The project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal, Police Department, Building O�cial,
42 Public Works and comments received have been included as conditions of approval.
43
44 B. The Child Care Facility will be licensed by the State of California through the Community
45 Care Licensing Board.
46
47 C. The project is required to comply with all federal, state and local laws. The applicant has
48 provided information as to compliance with applicable requirements.
49
50 D. Based on findings 3, 4, and 5 above.
51
52
53 7. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act
54 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (c), New Construction and Conversion of Small Structures,
55 which allows structures up to 10,000 square feet in urbanized areas when the use does not
56 involve significant amounts of hazardous materials, where all necessary public services and
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 4
1 facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive based on the
2 following:
3
4 A. The proposed project includes 1,516 square feet of classroom area.
5
6 B. The Child Care Center use does not involve the use of hazardous materials.
7
8 C. The project site is located in an area where all public services and facilities area
9 available.
10
11 D. The project is not located within an environmentally sensitive area in that the site is
12 located in a developed urban area. The site is developed with buildings, parking lot,
13 landscaping and a play yard. No water courses, wildlife, wildlife habitat,floodway or flood
14 plain or other environmentally sensitive areas are present.
15
16 E. The proposed project will not conflict in terms of operating days and hours with other
17 activities scheduled at the church site therefore the on-site parking shall be sufficient and
18 not impact the neighborhood. Furthermore the drop-off and pick-up times will be
19 staggered throughout the day resulting in less impact on the neighborhood.
20
21 F. Given that the operation of the child care center will not conflict in terms of days and
22 hours with other church functions the adjacent neighborhood will not be adversely
23 impacted by increased traffic.
24
25 G. The proposed use will be held to the City Standard Noise requirements as defined in the
26 City Municipal Code therefore the adjacent neighborhood will not be impacted with
27 increased noise levels.
28
29 8. Notice of the proposed project was provided in the following manner as required by the Zoning
30 Ordinance:
31
32 A. Posted in three places on the project site on July 16, 2010;
33 B. Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on July 16, 2010; and
34 C. Published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on July 18, 2010.
35
36 USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO ALLOW
37 THE OPERATION OF A CHILD CARE CENTER
38 AT 270 NORTH PINE STREET,APN 002-214-07
39 FILE NO: 10-11-UP-PC
40
41 1. Approval is granted for the operation of a Child Care Center as described in the project
42 descriptions submitted to the Community Development and Planning Department and date
43 stamped June 7, 2010 except as modified by the following conditions of approval.
44
45 2. This Use Permit is granted subject to the following hours of operation:
46
47 ■ Monday through Friday 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM
48
49 ■ Twice a month Parent Education Meeting 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
50
51 The parent education meetings shall not be scheduled at a time and day that conflict with other
52 scheduled events at the Church
53
54 3. The Child Care Center is limited to a maximum of 38 children.
55
MINUTE5 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 5
1 4. Plans submitted for building permit shall include a site plan that shows the location of and the
2 accurate number of parking stalls on the site.
3
4 5. A copy of the revised site plan submitted with the building permit shall be submitted to the
5 Planning Department for inclusion on the Use Permit File.
6
7 6. The drop-off and pick-up times for the children shall be staggered as noted in the project
8 description submitted by the applicant.
9
10 7. Noise generated from the child care center and outside play yard shall not exceed the established
11 noise standards as defined by the City's Municipal Code. Outside play time will be limited to a
12 total of three hours per day.
13
14 8. All signs on the project site shall conform to the regulations of City's Sign Ordinance Section 3227
15 (C)and are subject to sign permit approval.
16
17 From the Planninq Commission
18
19
20 9. Plans submitted for building permit (Change of Occupancy) shall include the following and
21 are subject to stafF review and approval:
22
23 A. A directional sign shall be installed at the Standley Street entrance to indicate that the clients
24 of the child care center shall enter the parking lot via Standley Street and exit onto Smith
25 Street.
26
27 10. The child care center handbook distributed to new clients shall be revised to include the following:
28
29 A. Clients of the child care facility shall park and turn off their vehicles when dropping off or
30 picking up children.There shall be no idling of cars in the parking lot.
31 B. Clients are required to enter the parking lot via Standley Street and exit onto Smith
32 Street.
33
34 From the Fire Marshal (Chuck Yatesl
35
36 11. As required by the Fire Code a fire alarm system shall be installed in the classrooms and
37 hallways leading to and around the classrooms.
38
39 From the Buildinq Official( David Willou4hbv)
40
41 12. A building permit is required for the change of occupancy to a day care center for 38 children and
42 8 administrator/teachers (a group E occupancy).
43
44 Standard Citv Conditions of Approval
45
46 13. Business operations shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
47 but not limited to business license, tenant improvement building permit, have been applied for
48 and issued/finaled.
49
50 14. No permit or entitlement shall be deemed effective unless and until all fees and charges
51 applicable to this application and these conditions of approval have been paid in full.
52
53 15. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
54 specification or ordinance of the Ciry of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
55 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28,2010
Page 6
1 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
2 and issued.
3
4 16. A copy of all conditions of this Use Permit shall be provided to and be binding upon any
5 future purchaser,tenant, or other party of interest.
6
7 17. All conditions of approval that do not contain specific completion periods shall be completed prior
8 to building permit final.
9
10 18. This Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project
11 related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions
12 of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this
13 approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been
14 suspended for 24 consecutive months.
15
16 19. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their
17 agents, successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its
18 agents, officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or
19 proceeding brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to
20 attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include,
21 but not be limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be
22 asserted by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the
23 City's action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence
24 on the part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to
25 be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement
26 shall remain in full force and effect.
27
28 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
29 10A. Downtown Zoning Code Workshop. Review and discussion of revised Table 4: Allowed Uses
30 and Permit Requirements and revised Section 13. Glossary
31
32 Staff: Requested the Commission continue discussion and review of Table 4:Allowed Uses and Permit
33 Requirements, particularly as the uses relate to the DC zone and Section 13. Glossary.
34
35 Eauipment Rental
36
37 Commission consensus: Refer to Glossary;
38 GU 8 UC=A(4a); Allowed; Major Use Permit for more than 5,000 square feet or 100 lineal feet
39 DC= Prohibit
40
41 Vehicle services—Minor maintenance/repair
42
43 Commission:
44 • Examples of uses: Car detailing, Quick lube
45
46 Commission consensus:
47 GU 8 UC = MIUP; Minor Use Permit regardless of size
48 DC= Prohibit
49
50 StoraQe—personal stora4e facilitv
51 Commission:
52 • Personal in-door/interior storage use may be appropriate in the DZC district.
53 • Not supportive of interior storage use in the DC zone.
54 • Most people are familiar with mini-storage facilities that are placed on land because they are a
55 relatively inexpensive investment and have a pretty good monetary return.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 7
1 • Questioned whether a property owner would go to the expense of having personal storage uses
2 in buildings when there are relatively inexpensive mini-storage units available on the perimeter
3 areas.
4
5 Chair Pruden: There are some very attractive personal storage facilities in the downtown area for cities.
6 If designed correctly to be inconspicuous, such uses can look like a regular building.
7
8 Staff: This type of use is not pedestrian oriented and there are design issues which may not be
9 consistent with the purpose of this Code or appropriate for the Downtown or on a City gateway. Familiar
10 with one mini-familiar with storefronts on the ground floor with the mini-storage behind the shopfront and
11 on upper floors. The mini-storage units on the upper floor had elevator access.
12
13 Commission: Would an indoor storage use considered 'ancillary' be allowed where the primary function,
14 for instance, was a retail component?
15
16 Staff: From staff's perspective, the bigger issue is the affect on the streetscape.The facility would either
17 have to be located behind the storefront or located above allowing for what is necessary on the ground
18 floor. The storage use would most likely be a second 'primary' use.
19
20 Commission: Preference—personal storage buildings with street frontage.
21
22 Staff: This depends upon what the Planning Commission recommends as a use for a building, which
23 could include an indoor storage use on the second story or behind a shopfront. of building. In this way the
24 streetscape would be maintained.
25
26 Commission consensus:
27 GU = MIUP (8), Minor UP; Allowed without a Use Permit when located behind a shopfront or above the
28 ground floor. with an allowed use on floors above the ground floor.
29 UC 8 DC = Prohibit
30
31 Homeless Facilitv—small 8�larqe
32
33 Staff: Discussed these uses with the Planning Director related to the Housing Element. The Planning
34 Director indicated that HCD has reviewed the Draft Housing Element and at this time the approach to this
35 type of facility would be to allow them in the C-2 zoning district and there is adequate vacant and
36 underutilized land with this zoning to accommodate additional facilities if needed. If the Commission
37 prefers to prohibit these facilities in all DZC zones this would be consistent with the Draft Housing
38 Element.
39
40 Commission: General discussion about possible sites available for a homeless shelter in the Orchard
41 Avenue area.
42
43 Commission consensus:
44 No change to GU zone= MAUP(2)(SDP would likely be required)
45 UC 8�DC =Prohibit
46
47 Commission:
48 • Okay with the additions to Table 4 Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements and definitions for
49 smoke shop,tasting room, equipment rental, vehicle services—minor&major.
50 • Okay with staff revised definitions for adult entertainment business, electric vehicle charging
51 station, pet services, pet store, and restaurant—formula fast food.
52
53 Commission noted the DZC boundaries can be revisited when the DZC Map is reviewed.
54
55 (Residentiall Dwellin4—condominium,duulex, multiple household
56
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 8
1 Commission: Discussed whether to add condition/restriction No. 8 or prohibit these uses in the DC zone.
2 There was concern how a mixed-use with a residential component would be considered?
3
4 Staff: Stated the 'Residential in a mixed-use building' use category clarifies any confusion and this
5 category is currently classified A(8) for all zones. Footnote #8 requires that the residential portion of the
6 building be located above the ground floor. This requires different use(s) on the ground floor, such as
7 retail, restaurant, o�ce.
8
9 Commission: Discussed 'residential'in a mixed-use building with an A(8)condition/restriction.
10
11 Staff: The concern is not whether there is one unit that takes up the entire floor or 10 units that are
12 condominiums, but rather that the building is residential with another type of use.
13
14 Chair Pruden: Stated the intent is to allow and encourage residential in a mixed-use building. There are
15 some long and narrow buildings in the Downtown. In the past, people typically lived behind their shops.
16 There are some buildings where an apartment could be constructed behind a shop and cited the Joseph
17 Jewelry building on S. State Street as a former example.
18
19 Staff: This type of scenario could be viewed upon as a live/work situation or 'residential' in a mixed-use
20 building where this use category states the unit must be above the ground floor or behind the storefront.
21
22 Commission Consensus:
23 GU 8�UC =Allowed; No change
24 DC= Prohibit
25
26 Commission Recommend: Modify footnote 8 to read Allowed on floors above the ground floor or
27 behind a street fronting use. Major Use Permit required to allow on the ground floor.
28
29 It was noted a building behind a storefront must meet all Fire Code standards.
30
31 It was further noted a definition is necessary for'Residential in a Mixed-Use Building.'
32
33 Bed and breakfast—5 rooms or fewer, more than 5 rooms
34 Hotel, motel—5 rooms or fewer. more than 5 rooms
35 There was Commission discussion about the use possibilities for the Palace Hotel.
36
37 There was further discussed about allowing by right bed and breakfast in the DZC in terms of size.
38 Footnote No. 3 states, 'Any use(s) that exceed gross square feet of floor area or 100 lineal feet on the
39 ground floor frontage when located on a Required Storefront Frontage on the Zoning Map requires
40 approval of a MIUP. Footnote 4 states, 'Any uses(s)that exceed 15,000 gross square feet of floor area on
41 the ground floor requires approval of a Major Use Permit.
42
43 Staff:
44 • If there are not impacts that need to be addressed through a use permit, a use permit should not
45 be required. The use has to comply with the standards in the Code, including parking. If the
46 Planning Commission wants to see these uses to determine if the use is appropriate for the site
47 or address potential impacts, then a use permit should be required whether the use is bed and
48 breakfast, hotel, motel.
49 • As written, the Commission would see this use based on the number of rooms and not the square
50 footage of the facility.
51
52 Commission: Agreed that a MAUP would be appropriate for bed and breakfast, hotel, motel with more
53 than 5 rooms in all zones and allowed in all zones for these same uses 5 rooms or fewer.
54
55 Commission consensus:
56 No changes were made to the original discussion.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 9
1
2 Church, chapel, reliqious assemblv and instruction
3
4 Commission:
5 • Discussion about storefront churches that exist in Ukiah.
6 • Many of these uses are only Sunday operations. Would this one day-a-week use be feasible in
7 the Downtown?
8 • There was further Commission discussion whether or not to allow such uses in the DC.
9
10 Commission Consensus:
11 GU = MIUP; No change
12 UC=A(3); No change
13 DC= Prohibit
14
15 Laundromat
16
17 Commission consensus:
18 GU =A(4a); No change
19 UC=A(4a); No change
20 DC =Prohibit
21
22 Second hand store.thrift store, pawn shoa
23
24 Commission: Discussed this use category and discussed whether to restrict or prohibit in the DC zone.
25 Referred to Glossary for second hand, thrift store and was of the opinion a pawn shop should be viewed
26 as a separate use.
27
28 Staff:
29 • An antique shop is a retail/commercial use.
30 • Recommended adding 'pawn shop'to the Personal services—restricted use category.
31
32 Commission consensus:
33 • Delete pawn shop from the definition of 'second hand store, thrift store' and from this use
34 category in Table 4A
35 • Add pawn shop to the examples included in definition of'personal services restricted'
36
37 Business services
38
39 Commission:
40 • Refer to Glossary, which states, 'See Section 9278 Definitions (reference is to current zoning
41 code).
42 • Not a Downtown use.
43
44 Commission consensus:
45 • GU& UC=MIUP;Always requires a Minor Use Permit regardless of size
46 • DC=Prohibit
47
48 Transportation service.transportation terminal
49
50 Commission consensus:
51 No change.
52
53 Parkinq lot
54
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 10
1 Staff: Existing parking lots can remain. Would the Commission want to see any more new parking lots in
2 the DC zone even with a major use permit?This use pertains to surface parking, is a standalone use and
3 pertains to a parcel just being used as a parking lot.
4
5 Commission consensus:
6 GU &UC = MAUP, no change
7 DC= Prohibit
8
9 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT
10 Staff/Commission discussion about the next step in the procedural review of the DCZ document.
11
12 12. ADJOURNMENT
13 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:13 p.m.
14
15
16 Judy Pruden, Chair
17
18 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
19
20
21
22
23
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 28, 2010
Page 11
� �,,�=c�chm:r.�:�t # _�_
Michelle Johnson
From: Sean Kaeser
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 1:14 PM
To: Michelle Johnson
Subject: FW:The Sandbox
Michelle,
I am fine with this plan although I am aware that in the past there has been unauthorized access into the school building
via the interior church doors that connect. In these events it was clients who were being provided services from the
church that had been able to enter the school via these unsecured interior doors. Nancy was also aware of this and one
of the reasons she made the suggestion to secure these interior doors. Due to fire code Im not sure this can be
corrected. But as I said in the past we have responded to this location due to subjects remaining in the building after
closing or being found inside the classrooms during business hours.
Sean
From: Nancy Sawyer
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 7:51 AM
To: Michelle]ohnson
Cc: Sean Kaeser
Subject: FW: The Sandbox
Michelle:
Please see below e-mail from the Director of The Sandbox at 270 N. Pine St. Per her e-mail it appears they have a plan
for their south entrance. If planning is comfortable with their proposal and feels it works on a safety level,then go with
their idea. There will be some re-training of the clients who normally use the south door. If the Church and the school
think they have a workable solution, it does not sound like it should be a problem? Please confirm with Lt. Kaeser as to
his agreement or disagreement with the proposed plan.
If you have any questions or comments, please advise.
Thanks,
Nnttcy Sazni/er, ICPS
Community Service Off+cer-#C11,
eusiness Liaiso�&Volunteer Coordinator
Ukiah Police Department
300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, CA 95482
Phone(707)467-5708,Fax(707)462-6068
nse wver@ citvofukiah.com
, ,
Ukioh Poliae De�arhment
�
Michelle Johnson
From: Nancy Sawyer
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 7:51 AM
To: Michelle Johnson
Cc: Sean Kaeser
Subject: FW:The Sandbox
Michelle:
Please see below e-mail from the Director of The Sandbox at 270 N. Pine St. Per her e-mail it appears they have a plan
for their south entrance. If planning is comfortable with their proposal and feels it works on a safety level,then go with
their idea. There will be some re-training of the clients who normally use the south door. If the Church and the school
think they have a workable solution, it does not sound like it should be a problem? Please confirm with Lt. Kaeser as to
his agreement or disagreement with the proposed plan.
If you have any questions or comments, please advise.
Thanks,
Nn�ic��SRZnyei�, ICPS
Community5ervice Officer•#C11,
Business Liaison&Volunteer Coordinator
Ukiah Police Department
300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, CA 95482
Phone(707)467-5708, Fax(707J 462-6068
nsa wver@ cityofukiah.com
�
Ukiah Pofice Department
From: Debra Ponton [mailto:qontondebra@�mail.coml
Sent: Friday, March 11, 201612:51 PM
To: Nancy Sawyer
Subject:The Sandbox
Hi Nancy,.
Sorry I missed your visit the other day at Tlze Sandbox. I have been sick.
Anyways, Cheryl are Americorp VISTA volunteer let me tcnow you stopped by. She showed me the
recomendations list and I appreciate the ideas you came up with. The entrance and exit has been discussed at
length and we have a very specific plan that ONLY the Childcare families will use the Southwest entrance.
ALL others will use the Northwest Entrance. We will be putting signs up to help so that it will be quite
clear. The church is also considering putting in a push button entry system for the Northwest door that will
limit entrance to only those with the code. I wish I could have been hear to let you icnow of this detailed plan.
1
From: Debra Ponton [mailto:pontondebra@�mail.coml
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 12:51 PM
To: Nancy Sawyer
Subject:The Sandbox
Hi Nancy,.
Sorry I missed your visit the other day at The Sandbox. I have been sick.
Anyways, Cheryl are Americorp VISTA volunteer let me know you stopped by. She showed me the
recomendations list and I appreciate the ideas you came up with. The entrance and exit has been discussed at
length and we have a very specific plan that ONLY the Childcare families will use the Southwest entrance.
ALL others will use the Northwest Entrance. We will be putting signs up to help so that it will be quite
clear. The church is also considering putting in a push button entry system for the Northwest door that will
limit entrance to only those with the code. I wish I could have been hear to let you know of this detailed plan.
If you have any other questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at 621-4616.
Regards,
Debra
P.S. Are you Charley's Mom?
z