HomeMy WebLinkAboutpcm_08102016 - Final 1 UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION
2 August 10, 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, Interim Planning Director Listed below, Respectively
14 Michelle Johnson, Assistant Planner
15 Ben Kageyama, Senior Civil Engineer
16 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
17
18 1. CALL TO ORDER
19 The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at
20 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California.
21
22 2. ROLL CALL
23
24 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Everyone cited.
25
26 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — The minutes from the May 11, 2016 and June 8, 2016 meeting are
27 included for review and approval.
28
29 M/S Sanders/Watt to approve May 11, 2016 meeting minutes, as submitted. Motion carried (5-0).
30
31 M/S Sanders/Christensen to approve June 8, 2016 meeting minutes, as submitted with Commissioner
32 Watts abstaining. Motion carried (4-0).
33
34 5. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
35
36 6. APPEAL PROCESS
37 Chair Whetzel read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting the final date to appeal is
38 August 22, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.
39
40 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION
41
42 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE-Confirmed by Staff.
43
44 9. PUBLIC HEARING
45 9A. CrossFit Firefly Major Site Development Permit, 510 South State Street,
46 File No.: 1944 SDP-PC. Consideration and possible action on a request for approval of a Major
47 Site Development Permit for the addition of a second story to an existing single story commercial
48 building to allow a group fitness studio; associated office space and equipment room; in an
49 existing commercial building at 510 South State Street, APN 003-031-41.
50
51 Associate Planner Johnson:
52 • Gave a staff report as provided for on pages 1-12 of the report and a PowerPoint presentation:
53 ■ Project description involves:
54 o Remodel and addition to existing vacant building.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 1
1 o New fa�ade on both School and State Streets.
2 o Parking lot with eight vehicle parking spaces and one ADA Space.
3 o New trees and live landscaped areas.
4 o Indoor bicycle parking for 10.
5 o Improvements to School Street.
6 o New signage.
7 ■ Talked about the landscaping and parking and noted the landscaping and parking
8 includes two street trees, 4 parking lot trees and 275 plus live landscaping.
9 ■ Talked about the revised site plans, dated August 10, 2016.
10 ■ The following staff report revisions have been made to the Project:
11 o Total square footage of the building is 9,222 sq. ft., compared to the initial total
12 building area of 9,947 sq. ft. (5,750 sq. ft. addition to an existing 4,197 sq. ft.
13 building) and showed the revised square footage for the first and second floors of
14 facility.
15 o Total square footage of addition is 4,700 sq. ft. and requires 26 parking spaces
16 less 2 spaces for bicycle parking = 24 spaces. Unique circumstances associated
17 with the proposed CrossFit facility results in a demand for less parking than
18 would normally be expected. The CrossFit facility would normally require one
19 space per 350 sq. ft. The CrossFit facility is 9,372 sq. ft. and would require 26 on-
20 site parking spaces. A two parking space reduction is granted given the 10
21 proposed bicycle parking spaces to be located within the building. This reduces
22 the total parking requirement to 24 spaces. The proposed project will provide 11
23 parking spaces. The reduced number of parking spaces is adequate for the use
24 due to unique circumstances. (Project Condition of Approval #11 specifically
25 addresses the unique circumstances).
26 o As noted above, the applicants propose 11 vehicle parking spaces.
27 o Alternative parking plan.
28 o Parking exemption is for 13 vehicle parking spaces.
29 ■ The Project is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan with regard that it would 1) promote
30 local businesses to keep capital local. 2) Use landscaping to improve appearance. 3)
31 Provides pedestrian access within urbanized areas. 4) Proposed project improves the
32 appearance of Downtown and City gateway.
33 ■ The Project is consistent with the C-1 Community Commercial Zoning District with regard
34 to:
35 o Use, development standards, landscaping, bicycle parking, Airport Compatibility
36 Zone.
37 ■ Demonstrated location of parking for project and neighboring businesses with regard to
38 parking in proximity verifying there are two public parking lots (+/- 75 vehicle parking
39 spaces), there is ample street parking and public transit available.
40 ■ Related to the proposed parking exception pertinent to the CrossFit model indicates the
41 Project: 1) is in close proximity to public transit. 2) there is on-street parking available. 3)
42 facility is in close proximity to on-street parking. 4) facility is located in close proximity to
43 public parking. 5) provides for bicycle parking. 6) provides for enhanced pedestrian
44 improvements. Staff supports the applicants' request for a parking reduction based on the
45 related circumstances specifically addressed on pages 5 and 6 of the staff report.
46 ■ On July 14, 2016, the DRB unanimously recommended the Planning Commission
47 approve the Project.
48 ■ While staff has received many letters in support of the Project, Amy Cline and Cindy
49 Gunderson owners of Ukiah Uniforms expressed concern in their letter dated August 10,
50 2016, about CrossFit employees potentially taking away the available on-street parking
51 from their business and other businesses in the neighborhood and referred to this
52 correspondence. As such, the Planning Commission may want to consider requiring a
53 management plan that would address designated employee parking.
54 ■ Staff recommends approval based on the following:
55 o Revised draft Findings in attachment 1
56 o Revised draft Conditions of Approval in attachment 2:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 2
1 From Planning Department
2
3 #3 The building shall not exceed 9,300 sq. ft.
4
5 From Public Works Department
6 #1 The right-of-way for School Street is 35 feet from the street centerline or
7 approximately 12 feet behind the face of curb. Parking improvements shall be
8 located on-site and not in the public right-of-way. A new minimum eight-foot wide
9 ADA compliant sidewalk shall be constructed along the School Street frontage,
10 including sidewalk depression at the driveway approach, new curb inlet Model
11 2'/z A (City Standard Drawing No. 404) on the south side of the driveway with
12 storm drain pipe, and curb and gutter replacement, to the satisfaction of the City
13 Engineer.
14
15 #2 A minimum of two street trees (Pistacia Chinensis) shall be located within five
16 feet of the back of School Street sidewalk in accordance with City Standard
17 Drawing No. 601).
18
19
20 Chair Whetrel:
21 • The building currently has two addresses and inquired if this will change.
22 • Requested clarification the Project is located outside the DZC designation.
23
24 Planning Assistant Johnson:
25 • Would defer the aforementioned question to applicant.
26 • Confirmed the proposed project is not only located outside the DZC but also outside of the
27 Downtown Parking District No.1. The project is actually one parcel away from being in the
28 Downtown Parking District No.1 where if this were the case, the applicants would not have to
29 provide for any parking.
30
31 Commissioner Sanders:
32 • Commended planning staff for doing a nice job on the project analysis and for highlighting the
33 rationale for the reduction in parking.
34 • Appreciates that the applicants talked with the neighbors about the Project.
35
36 Commissioner Watt:
37 • Requested clarification the proposed indoor bicycle parking complies with the City bicycle parking
38 requirements and asked what would occur if in the future a different business wants to come in at
39 the same location. How do the bicycle parking requirements for this project transfer and/or what is
40 the mechanism/process/procedure that allows such a transfer to occur?
41 • Related to the parking study conducted of the area looking at the usage of the public parking lots
42 and off-street parking in the area asked if the current occupancy/use of the public lots that are
43 mentioned for the project was actually a consideration.
44 • Asked about the zoning designations on the West side of School Street.
45 • In the future what would occur if a like business desires to use the existing building space does
46 the 24 space parking requirement still apply and/or does the existing parking exception `flow with
47 the land' to the new project such that the exception only pertains to the proposed development?
48 Requested clarification the proposed parking exception is only correlated with the proposed
49 CrossFit project.
50
51 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
52 • Would likely have to look at the bicycle parking requirements on a case-by-case basis and
53 possibly even so if the use is allowed.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 3
1 • Confirmed a parking study was completed about 12 years ago and acknowledged not a lot has
2 changed in this regard. The study indicated the parking situation in the Downtown area is
3 underutilized, including the City parking lots.
4 • Related to a future-like business using the existing space whether or not the parking exception for
5 the CrossFit facility applies would likely be looked at/considered on a case-by-case basis whether
6 or not the project is a Use Permit, Site Development Permit and/or an allowed use by right.
7
8 Assistant Planner Johnson:
9 • Attachment 4 of the staff report from Google Maps shows the off-street and public parking
10 facilities in connection with the proposed project and referred to the photographs the applicants
11 took concerning off-street parking in the area where the proposed project is located that were
12 taken at different peak times of the day, i.e., 8:00 a.m./6:00 p.m. on different months and days of
13 the week. This shows how the different parking spaces are being used and the photos indicate
14 parking spaces are consistently available.
15 • Page 3 of the staff report addresses the zoning consistency. The subject property is located
16 within the boundaries of the C-1 (Community Commercial) zoning district. All the zoning directly
17 across from School Street is designated C-1 except for the parcel where the Ukiah Daily Journal
18 was formerly located. Specifically, page 4 of the staff report shows the different uses surrounding
19 the property.
20 • If a project is proposed for that same facility that is a like use with similar characteristics such as
21 the same number of participants per ratio of instructors, hours of operation and with no expansion
22 to the building footprint, etc., the argument could be made that it would be reasonable to
23 approve the project based on the existing parking exception. As such, a like use with the same
24 characteristics would still be operating in the same environment with the same exception. Would
25 have to clarify, however, the proposed project is not a Use Permit because exceptions for this
26 permit type `run with the land' unlike a Site Development Permit which is essentially a permit to
27 develop the site. The proposed project is not a Use Permit but rather a Site Development Permit.
28
29 Commissioner Watt:
30 • Requested clarification `the exception does not remove the requirement.'
31 • What would occur if the use was different such as if a restaurant moved into the building?
32 • Asked about the Downtown Parking District No.1 boundaries in relation to the Project. How do the
33 requirements for the Downtown Parking District No.1 affect those businesses mesh with the
34 proposed project and was this contemplated? Requested clarification there is no requirement
35 necessarily for those particular businesses adjacent to the proposed project that are located in
36 the Downtown Parking District No.1 to have to provide parking.
37 • Right now there is no parking requirement for what is currently existing for the building in the
38 Downtown Parking District No.1 but if someone wanted to increase a building footprint, the
39 project would have to account for the parking that would likely increase as a result of the
40 proposed building footprint expansion such that the project is no longer exempt.
41
42 Assistant Planner Johnson:
43 • The exception will go with a use that is of a similar nature so if a new business with a like use
44 having the same characteristics moves into the building the same exception would apply because
45 it would be an allowed use.
46 • The use would have to be identical and/or similar for the parking exception to apply as based
47 and/or provided for in the project conditions.
48 • Those businesses located in the Downtown Parking District No.1 are exempt from compliance
49 with the City of Ukiah parking standards. Related to how the Downtown Parking District No.1 and
50 corresponding requirements in connection with how parking for this project may be affected, staff
51 initially analyzed the project based upon on the premise that the subject property is one parcel
52 away from the Downtown Parking District No.1 making the argument the parking exemption does
53 not apply because of the proposed expansion of the building's footprint. One of the requirements
54 of the Downtown Parking District No.1 is that the building footprint to an existing building cannot
55 increase. The proposed project is located outside of the Downtown Parking District No.1 and is
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 4
1 therefore, subject to the City of Ukiah parking regulations in which an exception to the City
2 parking standards is being requested.
3 • Confirmed a building located in the Downtown Parking District No.1 is currently exempt from City
4 parking requirements unless the footprint of this particular building was to increase.
5
6 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
7 • The Downtown Parking District#1 boundaries are contiguous to the subject property.
8 • The parking for the Downtown require that either no parking needs to be provided if the storefront
9 of the building is not being expanded and the building is located in the Downtown Parking District
10 #1 or, if the building in the Downtown is located in the DZC district or C-1 zoning district, the
11 parking requirements vary. The Downtown Parking District No. 1 consists of PF, C-1, C-2, R-2,
12 DZC zoning. The proposed project is located in the C-1 (Community Commercial) zoning district
13 which requires for Personal Services and Personal Improvement Facility uses one parking space
14 for each 350 sq. ft. of gross leasable space, but this use may not be allowed in some of the
15 zoning districts and/or if allowed the parking requirements may vary.
16
17 Commissioner Hilliker:
18 • Asked about plans for protection of the windows on the either side of the building. Some
19 individuals like to break windows at street level.
20 • Also, has concern about potential damage and reoccurring damage to the building during hours
21 of non-operation and/or when the building is unoccupied.
22 • Asked about the proposed widening of the sidewalk and is this consistent with the rest of the
23 sidewalks in the neighborhood. Asked about other buildings that abut the subject property in
24 connection with proximity to the sidewalk on School Street.
25 • Asked about potential reuse of the building and future street improvements that may be required.
26 • Asked about the signs on the southern side of the proposed garden area requiring a permit to
27 park in this area.
28
29 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
30 • Sidewalk widths on School Street vary.
31 • Acknowledged there is a house that was converted to a commercial use that is located very close
32 to the sidewalk on School Street.
33 • The previous property owner leased the parking spaces in the garden area to the public. The
34 signs will be removed because the parking accommodations in this area are for use by the
35 proposed project.
36
37 Senior Civil Engineer Kageyama:
38 • Confirmed the sidewalk widths on School Street vary between 5 and 12 feet on School Street in
39 the neighborhood of the proposed project.
40 • It is unlikely that future street improvements would be required after the proposed project. City
41 Public Works initially recommended the existing sidewalk be widened. The applicant is proposing
42 a slightly narrower sidewalk that would be a minimum 8-foot wide ADA compliant sidewalk along
43 the School Street frontage, including sidewalk depression at the driveway approach, new curb
44 inlet on the south side of the driveway with storm drain pipe and curb and gutter replacement.
45
46 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:37 p.m.
47
48 Ferdinand Thieriot, Applicant:
49 • Related to the two addresses on the building, the intent is to have a School Street address since
50 this will become the front of the building. There has been discussion about eliminating the 510
51 and 512 South State Street addresses. Egress to the facility will be from School Street.
52
53 Chair Whetzel:
54 • Is there a plan for emergency exists?
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 5
1 • Requested clarification the State Street side of the building will only be used for 'exiting'
2 purposes.
3
4 Commissioner Sanders:
5 • Thanked the applicants for proposing a nice project.
6 • Inquired if the windows are 'see through' on School Street and State Street?
7 • Can the windows be opened on the upper floor?
8 • The proposed project is highly supported by the community and neighbors. Asked about the
9 business concern regarding parking and if there was outreach taken to address this concern.
10
11 Commissioner Watt:
12 • Referenced the letter from Amy Cline and Cindy Gunderson, business owners of Ukiah Uniforms,
13 dated August 10, 2016 expressing concern about employee parking and asked if the applicants
14 talked to them.
15
16 Ferdinand Thieriot:
17 • Confirmed two emergency exists will be provided.
18 • Confirmed the State Street side of the building will only be used to exit the building.
19 • On the State Street side of the building where people will be exercising in the space provided, the
20 lower windows may have shades or have plexyglass in them. Some people are sensitive to being
21 on display. The other windows will be translucent.
22 • Confirmed the windows on the upper floor can be opened and explained the design and how the
23 window works to allow for natural light.
24 • Talked with the concerned business neighbor and she did not know the direction of the building
25 was going to be changed. It will not be possible to access the building from State Street so this
26 will discourage people from walking around the perimeter of building. The issue concerning
27 parking has been resolved and the owners are pleased.
28 • Acknowledged the applicants talked to the owners of Ukiah Uniforms.
29
30 Tracy Thieriot, Applicant:
31 • Addressed the owners of Ukiah Uniforms and noted they were not familiar with the proposed
32 project. We, as applicants, talked to the owners about the project and how the building will be
33 updated. The issue the Ukiah Uniforms business owners have with the neighboring businesses
34 concerns employee parking. Employees want to park as close as they can to where they work so
35 they park in front of other businesses and this interferes with customers being able to easily
36 frequent a particular business. This is an ongoing issue. We were asked about the proposed
37 project and parking and were able to explain parking is being provided, we are upgrading the
38 entire back area on School Street with the intent to provide as much parking for the facility as
39 possible. The business owners were initially not understanding the issues we are dealing with in
40 terms of the parking calculations or building expansion. Explained to the business owners that in
41 order to comply with City parking regulations part of the building would have to be removed to fit
42 26 parking spaces.
43
44 Commissioner Watt:
45 • Related to business employees parking in front of other businesses, asked about how many
46 employees/instructors will CrossFit Firefly have?
47 • Where is CrossFit Firefly currently located?
48 • Asked about the parking issue, parking exception and how this might affect other businesses in
49 the area.
50 • Asked if CrossFit had 15 students and one or two instructors, that the space in front of the
51 property and in back of the property together with parking spaces provided should be able to
52 accommodate this number of persons?
53
54 Commissioner Christensen:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 6
1 • Would the applicants be amenable to adding a condition that CrossFit Firefly puts in its employee
2 packet that employees as per their agreement must park in an employee designated parking
3 space.
4 • Requested clarification that to include a condition about employee designated parking would be
5 difficult to enforce?
6 • What kind of activities are going to occur outside in the parking lot area on School Street
7 crossfit-wise?
8 • If successful, would expanding the hours of operation be a consideration beyond 6:00 a.m. to
9 7:00 p.m.?
10 • Asked about the length of time for the classes.
11
12 Commissioner Hilliker:
13 • Is pleased with the project.
14 • Appreciates that the building is going to be upgraded and no longer an eyesore.
15 • Could not tell from the site plans if the facility will include saunas?
16 • Inquired when the applicants anticipate the facility will open.
17
18 Maureen Mulheren, Ukiah City Council:
19 • Advised she and Councilmember Brown are participating on a Downtown parking ad hoc
20 committee for City Council. A press release was sent out today concerning a public workshop for
21 parking in the Downtown that will be held at 6:00 p.m., August 23, 2016 at the Ukiah Conference
22 Center.
23 • While the project is located outside the Downtown Parking District No. 1, consideration is being
24 given concerning possibly adding diagonal parking on School Street versus the existing parallel
25 parking. It may be that diagonal parking can be extended further down on School Street to where
26 the Ukiah Daily Journal was formerly located. Each block allows for roughly four parking spaces
27 so a conversion to diagonal parking where feasible would increase the number of parking space
28 provided there are no curb cuts.
29 • During the Downtown parking workshop the intent is to address some of the parking issues
30 businesses have.
31
32 Ferdinand Thieriot:
33 • As owner, he will be present at CrossFit frequently and will skateboard to work. The business will
34 have trainers present and will have reserve parking for them.
35 • CrossFit Firefly exists only on paper. There are no paying clients at this time.
36 • Has observed the parking accommodations in the neighborhood at different hours of the day. He
37 understands the parking requirements and finds that parking is always available. Street parking is
38 public so anyone can park where he/she wants.
39 • Is of the opinion CrossFit can provide parking to accommodate 15 students and 2 instructors.
40 Classes are one hour long so the parking is not for long term.
41 • Does not know if he can designate parking for an employee on the street and be able to enforce
42 it. He can ask employees to park in designated and/or the same place on the street as much as is
43 possible as a courtesy to the neighboring businesses. Wants to focus on operating a business
44 and not policing parking for his facility.
45 • Confirmed requiring employee designated parking would be difficult to enforce.
46 • Explained what type of crossfit activities would occur in the contained area of the parking lot, i.e.,
47 sprinting, sled-pushing and/or other cumbersome activities related to crossfit-related exercises
48 that require space to perForm.
49 • Weekend hours may be added.
50 • Confirmed CrossFit classes are one hour except the lunch hour classes will be 30 minutes
51 allowing 30 minutes for the workout and 30 minutes to change and shower.
52 • The plans for remodel of the building have changed such that saunas are no longer part of the
53 plans and explained why.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 7
1 • Related to the timeframe for getting started on revitalization of the building will depend upon the
2 permitting process. Is of the opinion construction should move along well. The remodel is not
3 complicated.
4
5 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
6 • Reiterated again the parking regulations in the DZC and/or other districts differ from the
7 Downtown Parking District No.1. The proposed project is not located in the Downtown Parking
8 District.
9
10 Chair Whetzel:
11 • It may be necessary to look at the Downtown Parking District No. 1 boundaries for possible
12 modification into commercial zoning designations.
13
14 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 6:50 p.m.
15
16 Chair Whetzel:
17 • Likes the project.
18 • Parking is not going to be an issue. It looks as though City Council is looking at parking
19 accommodations in the Downtown and this is a good thing.
20 • With the proposed bicycle and the location of the CrossFit facility within walking distance and
21 somewhat centrally located is of the opinion parking for the project should not be a problem.
22 • Does not support the concept of conditioning the project to require that employee parking be
23 designated because this would be difficult to police/enforce.
24 • It may be important to look at certain commercially zoned parcels in terms of assessing whether
25 or not the parking is adequate should a project be proposed or business wants to expand.
26 • Supports project approval.
27
28 Commissioner Sanders:
29 • Attachment 4 of the staff report shows the on-off street parking from Google Map and this `says it
30 all' demonstrating parking for the Project should not be a problem. There are 75 +/- vacant
31 parking spaces available in terms of public parking.
32 • It is unlikely other businesses would be impacted with regard to parking by the proposed Project.
33 • Likes that the applicants took the time to talk to neighboring businesses about the Project.
34 • Does not support conditioning the project to require employee parking be designed and cited a
35 daycare facility at the Methodist Church where the same issue was discussed more or less as it
36 pertains to safety, but the Commission did determine that designating employee parking was not
37 necessary. Adults are capable of using good judgment or a Management Plan can effectively
38 address the matter of employee parking.
39 • Supports project approval.
40
41 Commissioner Watt:
42 • Recalls when the Tesla project was proposed public members complained there was not enough
43 parking available.
44 • Does not necessarily accept there are 75 vacant parking spaces available. There are 75 public
45 parking spaces and they get used at various times during the week. Given the way the CrossFit
46 business is setup with the number of students and instructors operating at the facility and the
47 number of parking spaces in the parking lot and on the street should sufficiently be able to
48 accommodate the crossfit use.
49 • Likes the Project.
50 • Supports project approval.
51
52 Commissioner Christensen:
53 • Is pleased the Commission addressed the matter of parking for the Project and is of the opinion
54 based on the business setup, hours of operation, number of clients and trainers parking for the
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 8
1 Project should not be a problem and supports the parking exception requested by the applicants
2 because it would not be possible to comply with the City parking standards.
3 • Supports the Downtown Parking Ad Hoc committee is looking at the parking accommodations in
4 the Downtown area with regard to the boundaries of the Downtown Parking District No. 1 and
5 make a determination whether or not modification to the boundaries would be beneficial since
6 businesses in this jurisdiction are exempt from the City Parking regulations and as such cannot
7 expand their building footprint. It may be that a business located on a parcel in the Downtown
8 Parking District No. 1 wants to expand the building footprint. Some of parcels depending upon
9 where they are located i.e., DZC, commercial zone, Downtown Parking District No. 1 cannot
10 comply with the City parking regulations for that particular zone. It may be beneficial to look at the
11 square footage per parking space to determine whether an adjustment should be done for the
12 parcels adjacent to the Downtown Parking District because what if a restaurant was proposed,
13 there would be a lot of tables where the project could never be adequately parked according to
14 City rules.
15 • Has observed there are really only four, one hour sessions what she would consider peak
16 Downtown parking hours, which are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., so people will come
17 and go and it is not like they are going to leave their car parked on the street for long periods of
18 time, if they are parking on the street.
19 • Has been in the area at different times of the day and has never had a problem parking south of
20 the Alex Thomas Jr. Plaza. Parking is simply not an issue in this area.
21 • Supports approval of the project, is fine with the parking exception and is of the opinion parking
22 should not be an issue for the Project. The Project would be an improvement to the
23 neighborhood.
24
25 Commissioner Hilliker:
26 • Is pleased the applicants talked to the neighboring businesses about the Project.
27 • Likes the Project.
28 • Is of the opinion parking for the Project would not be an issue.
29 • Has not had a problem parking in this area of the Downtown.
30 • Expressed concern about the two trees located near the sidewalk on School Street and asked
31 who is responsible for maintenance.
32 • Supports project approval.
33
34 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
35 • The property owner would be responsible for maintenance of the trees.
36
37 M/S Sanders/Hilliker to approve CrossFit Firefly Major Site Development Permit, File No.: 1944 SDP-PC
38 with the revised Findings in Attachment 1 and revised Conditions of Approval in Attachment 2. Motion
39 carried (5-0).
40
41 10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
42 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
43 • The regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 2016 is cancelled.
44 • City Council will again be looking at adopting the City budget at the next regular meeting. The
45 money budgeted for training purposes for the Planning Commissioners is included in the
46 proposed Planning Department budget.
47 • Advised that the Planning Commission will review the proposed Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance
48 in September with comments and potentially a recommendation to City Council.
49 • Advised of a proposed rezone of a parcel located in the Home Depot parking lot.
50 • Formally advised the Commission that Planning Director Stump has retired and he is the Interim
51 Planning Director. Planning staff is looking at the option of having an on-call planning service in
52 the event there is a need.
53 • Provided an update on the Costco project.
54
55 Commissioner Hilliker:
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 9
1 • Asked about the status of the housing project the Planning Commission approved on Gobbi
2 Street and Oak Street.
3
4 Interim Planning Director Thompson:
5 • The aforementioned project is not likely going to happen.
6
7 11. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORT
8 Commissioner Hilliker:
9 • Sees the PEP senior housing project is progressing and that the facility will be very`sturdy.'
10
11 Commissioner Sanders:
12 • The community needs more housing availability. Asked what the City can do facilitate more
13 housing opportunities and cited the PEP senior housing project as a good example.
14
15 Chair Whetzel:
16 • Asked if Planning staff can find out why MacDonalds on E. Perkins Street does not use the
17 second drive-thru facility that was approved as part of the project operation.
18
19 12. ADJOURNMENT
20 There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:18 p.m.
21
22
23 Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary
24
25
26
27
28
29 FINAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
30
31 CROSSFIT FIREFLY FINAL FINDINGS
32 MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
33 510 SOUTH STATE STREET
34 APN 003-031-41
35 FILE NO: MUNIS 1944
36
37
38 1. The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan as described in the staff report,
39 including Table 1.
40
41 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance as described in Table
42 2 of the staff report.
43
44 3. The Project, as conditioned, is consistent with the requirements for zone C (Common Traffic Pattern)
45 of Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan as described in the staff report and below:
46
47 A. Intensity of Development: The intensity of development of the site with the addition would
48 be similar to existing surrounding development. Many of the parcels in the area are
49 developed at close to 100% lot coverage with the building covering almost the entire parcel.
50 Other parcels in the area are developed with a building, onsite parking and a small amount of
51 landscaping similar to the proposed Project.
52
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 10
1 B. Allowed Uses: The intensity of the use is does not exceed other allowed uses within the "C"
2 designation including: intensive retail and manufacturing uses and multi-family uses.
3
4 C. Maximum Density: Based on a .26 of acre a maximum of 41 people would be allowed on
5 the site at any one time. The project description includes one class of 15 people and 2
6 employee's maximum.
7
8 D. Open Land: Based on an 11,600 square foot(.26 acre) parcel and 9,372 +/-square foot
9 building, approximately 80% of the parcel would be developed with building and structures,
10 leaving 15% as open land which meet the minimum requirement of 15% recommended open
11 land.
12
13 4. The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient
14 vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern because the Department of Public Works has reviewed the
15 proposal and supports the project. The project proposes the widening of the sidewalk to 8' along
16 School Street, further enhancing pedestrian movement.
17
18 5. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic on
19 adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses
20 because the on-site parking, as well as the off-site parking has not created hazards in the past and
21 would not create hazards if the proposed project is approved. This is primarily due to the low volume
22 of traffic on School Street, which provides access to the Crossfit parking lot.
23
24 6. The proposed project includes a modification to an existing building with a total building height of 24
25 feet, which is consistent with the maximum height requirement. The additional 4,850 square feet of
26 building area, new landscaping and parking lot would not restrict or cut out light and air on the
27 property, or on the property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings
28 in the neighborhood, or impair the value thereof.
29
30 7. The proposed project is adjacent to (C-1) Community Commercial Zoning; therefore, the
31 improvements to the commercial structure will not have a substantial detrimental impact on the
32 character or value of any residential zoning district.
33
34 8. The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including trees,
35 shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade because the site currently does not have natural features. The
36 proposal includes the addition of landscaped areas with street tree species as provided for on the
37 City's approved list.
38
39 9. There is sufficient variety, creativity and articulation to the architecture and design of the structure and
40 grounds to avoid monotony and or a box-like uninteresting external appearance. The project involves
41 a two-story addition, a new fa�ade along both State and School Streets with a lively indoor/ outdoor
42 space along School Street. It has been reviewed by the City Design Review Board, who
43 unanimously found it to be a good fit for the block, and match the architecture of the neighborhood.
44
45 10. The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section15301 Class 1 (e);
46 Additions to existing structures that do not exceed 10,000 square feet where all public services are
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 11
1 available and the project area is not environmentally sensitive. City staff has determined that all
2 public services are currently serving the site and are available to serve the site after the addition is
3 constructed. The site is characterized as infill with no significant plant or animal habitat value.
4
5 11. The Planning Commission has the authority to reduce the number of required parking spaces if the
6 finding can be made that an unusual circumstance is associated with the proposal that warrants a
7 reduction.
8
9 Unique circumstances associated with the proposed Crossfit facility results in a demand for less
10 parking than would normally be expected. The Crossfit facility would normally require 1 space per 350
11 square feet. The Crossfit facility is 9,372 square feet and would require 26 on-site parking spaces. A
12 two-parking space reduction is granted given the 10 proposed bicycle parking spaces to be located
13 within the building. This reduces the total parking requirement to 24 spaces. The proposed project will
14 provide 11 parking spaces. This reduced number of parking spaces is adequate for the proposed use
15 due to the following unique circumstances:
16
17 • The parking required by the Crossfit facility will occur when the on-street parking demand for
18 the surrounding businesses is at its lowest level. The time of use for the Crossfit facility is
19 Monday -Thursday 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and Friday 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. with heaviest use
20 anticipated outside of regular business hours. Monday-Thursday three of six daily classes occur
21 outside of busiest times for surrounding uses from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. and after 6:00 p.m.
22 During the day, from 2:00-4:00 p.m. Crossfit offers an "open gym" session which is limited to
23 one-on-one instruction.
24
25 • The Crossfit business model is different from an open gym in that patrons participate in guided
26 classes only, with a maximum size of 15 people per class one class at a time; thereby, limiting
27 the number of people in the facility at any given time.
28
29 • The need for on-site parking to serve the Crossfit Facility is further reduced because there is
30 ample street parking located along State Street, Seminary Avenue and School Street to serve
31 both the Crossfit facility and surrounding businesses.
32
33 • Mendocino County Transit Route 9 runs directly in front of the proposed business with a transit
34 stop within .25 miles.
35
36
37 FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—USE PERMIT
38
39 CROSSFIT FIREFLY FINAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
40 MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
41 510 SOUTH STATE STREET
42 APN 003-031-41
43 FILE NO: MUNIS 1944
44
45 General
46
47 1. Approval is granted for the 4,700 square foot addition to an existing building located at 510 South
48 State Street as described in the project description and associated materials submitted to the
49 Planning and Community Development Department and date stamped July 6, 2016 (description)
50 and August 3, 2016 and August 10, 2016 (revised plans).
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 12
1
2 2. Plans submitted for building permit shall be in substantial conformance with the plans
3 conditionally approved by the Planning Commission.
4
5 3. Signs require application for and approval of a Sign Permit from the Planning and Community
6 Development Department.
7
8 4. Construction hours 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 4:00
9 p.m., unless specifically approved by the Public Works Director. Construction is prohibited on
10 Sundays and holidays recognized by the City of Ukiah, unless approved by the Public Works
11 Director. Interior construction is exempt from these hours provided that construction noise is not
12 audible at the project property lines.
13
14 5. On plans submitted for building permit these conditions of approval shall be included as notes on
15 the first sheet.
16
17 Standard City Conditions
18
19 1. This Site Development Permit can be revoked through the City's revocation process if the
20 approved project related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these
21 stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the
22 effective date of this approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has
23 ceased or has been suspended for 24 consecutive months.
24
25 2. This approval is not effective until the 10-day appeal period applicable to this Site Development
26 Permit has expired without the filing of a timely appeal. If a timely appeal is filed, the project is
27 subject to the outcome of the appeal and shall be revised as necessary to comply with any
28 modifications, conditions, or requirements that were imposed as part of the appeal.
29
30 3. 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
33 4. The property owner shall obtain and maintain any permit or approval required by law, regulation,
34 specification or ordinance of the City of Ukiah and other Local, State, or Federal agencies as
35 applicable. All construction shall comply with all fire, building, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and
36 structural laws, regulations, and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved
37 and issued.
38
39 5. A copy of all conditions of this Site Development shall be provided to and be binding upon any
40 future purchaser, tenant, or other party of interest.
41
42 6. This approval is contingent upon agreement of the applicant and property owner and their agents,
43 successors and heirs to defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its agents,
44 officers, attorneys, employees, boards and commissions from any claim, action or proceeding
45 brought against any of the foregoing individuals or entities, the purpose of which is to attack, set
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 13
1 aside, void or annul the approval of this application. This indemnification shall include, but not be
2 limited to, damages, costs, expenses, attorney fees or expert witness fees that may be asserted
3 by any person or entity, including the applicant, arising out of or in connection with the City's
4 action on this application, whether or not there is concurrent passive or active negligence on the
5 part of the City. If, for any reason any portion of this indemnification agreement is held to be void
6 or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall
7 remain in full force and effect.
8
9 7. Use of the facility shall not commence until all permits required for the approved use, including
10 but not limited to business license, building permit, or other have been applied for and
11 issued/finaled.
12
13 8. In addition to any other condition imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire,
14 electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the
15 time the Building Permit is approved and issued.
16
17 Planninq and Community Development
18
19 1. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall install the proposed 10 bicycle parking spaces.
20 2. Any new exterior lighting shall be kept to a minimum to provide adequate security. All exterior
21 lighting fixtures shall be low wattage and recognized by and consistent with the fixtures endorsed
22 by the International Dark Sky Association. The exterior lighting fixtures shall be hooded and
23 downcast and shall not glare onto adjacent properties, streets or up towards the night sky.
24
25 3. The building with addition shall not exceed 9,300 sq. ft.
26
27 Fire Department Conditions
28
29 1. This project will be a great improvement to this area of our City. These improvements will require
30 a plan review by the Fire Marshal/ Prevention Office. Items such as a fully automatic fire sprinkler
31 system, monitored alarms, knox box (lockable key box), and properly installed fire extinguishers
32 shall be addressed during the plan check portion of this project.
33
34 Public Works Comments
35
36 1. The right-of-way for School Street is 35 feet from the street centerline or approximately 12 feet
37 behind the face of curb. Parking improvements shall be located on-site and not in the public
38 right-of-way. A new minimum 8-foot wide ADA compliant sidewalk shall be constructed along the
39 School Street frontage, including sidewalk depression at the driveway approach, new curb inlet
40 Model 2'/ZA (City Standard Drawing No. 404) on the south side of the driveway with storm drain
41 pipe, and curb and gutter replacement, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
42
43 2. A minimum of two street trees (Pistacia Chinensis) shall be located within 5 feet of the back of
44 School Street sidewalk in accordance with City Standard Drawing No. 601.
45
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 14
1 3. If new plumbing fixtures are proposed, City of Ukiah sewer connection fees shall apply and be
2 paid at the time of building permit issuance.
3
4 4. The existing sewer lateral shall be tested in accordance with City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 1105
5 and repaired or replaced if necessary prior to final inspection.
6
7 5. All work within the public right-of-way shall be performed by a licensed and properly insured
8 contractor. The contractor shall obtain an encroachment permit for work within this area or
9 otherwise affecting this area. Encroachment permit fee shall be $45 plus 3% of estimated
10 construction costs.
11
12 6. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved with asphaltic concrete, concrete, or other
13 alternative surfacing, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
14
15 7. An on-site drainage inlet in the parking area appears to connect to the City storm drain. Any
16 modification to the storm drain connection shall require an encroachment permit.
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION August 10, 2016
Page 15