The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1999-10-20 PacketPROCLA ON WHEREAS, violence against women and children continues to become more prevalent as a social problem because of the imbalance of power due to gender and age; and The problems of domestic violence are not confined to any group of people but cross all economic, racial, affectional preference, and societal barriers; and The crime of domestic violence defiles an individualts privacy, dignity, security, and humanity due to systematic use of physical, emotional, sexual, psychological, and economic control and?or abuse; and The impact of domestic violence is wide ranging, directly affecting women and children and society as a whole; and It is battered women themselves who have been at the forefront of efforts to bring peace and equality to the home; and Project Sanctuary in 1998, received 2,119 domestic violence crisis calls, sheltered 216 battered women and children, and provided 2,329 safe shelter nights, in addition to providing other supportive services. NO W, THEREFORE, I, Jim Mastin, Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of my fellow City Councilmembers, Phillip Ashiku, Phil Baldwin, Kathy Libby, and Roy Smith, in recognition of the important work done by domestic violence programs, do hereby proclaim October, 1999, as DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH and urge all citizens to actively participate in the scheduled activities and programs sponsored by Project Sanctuary to work toward the elimination of personal and institutional violence. Dated: October 20, 1999 3a WHEREAS, United Way has now reached its 112th year of caring for those less fortunate than ourselves and working toward building strong, healthy communities; and WHEREAS, United Way, Sonoma-Mendocino.Lake is primarily a group of volunteers from our own three-County community; and WHEREAS, contributions given by local people through United Way, Sonoma- Mendocino-Lake help local people through organizations such as: The American Red Cross, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Mendocino County, The Greater Ukiah Senior Center, Willits Seniors, Inc., People for People Ombudsman, Project Sanctuary, The Ford Street Project, Mendocino Family and Youth, North Coast Opportunities, Plowshares, Willits Community Services and Food Bank, Community Care Management, and The Ukiah Community Center; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah employees continue to generously support United Way, having contributed more than $3,000 in 1998; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ukiah wishes to congratulate United Way, Sonoma-Mendocino.Lake for its past endeavors and wishes it well in the current drive for funds to continue and even add to those charitable institutions it assists in our community. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jim Mastin, Mayor of the City of Ukiah, on behalf of my fellow City Councilmembers, Phillip Ashiku, Phil Baldwin, Kathy Libby, and Roy Smith, do hereby proclaim November, 1999, as UNI TED WA Y M 0 N TH IN THE CI T Y 0 F UKIA H and urge support from every citizen, to the extent possible, for this campaign, its volunteer workers, agencies, and programs. Dated: October 20, 1999 Mastin, Mayor Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority A joint powers public agency October 12, 1999 Michael E. Sweeney General Manager P.O. Box 123 Ukiah, CA 954482 Telephone (707) 468-9710 Fax (707) 468-3877 meswee ney~pa cific, n et Report to City of Ukiah 1. What is the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA)? A joint powers authority created in 1990 by the Cities of Ukiah, Willits, and Fort Bragg and the County of Mendocino. 2. Why was MSWMA created? New laws had made solid waste a much more difficult responsibility for local governments. They recognized they could do the job better, and cheaper, by a joint effort on some tasks. · 3. How is MSWMA governed? By a Board of Directors consisting of one council member from each city and two county supervisors. They appoint a General Manager to direct the day-to-day activities. 4. Where does MSWMA get its funds? No general fund monies from the member jurisdictions are used. MSWMA is funded by a $5 per ton surcharge on solid waste disposal within Mendocino County (reduced from $6), supplemented by state grant funds and charges to businesses for hazardous waste disposal service. The current fiscal year budget is $407,000. 5. What does MSWMA do? Current responsibilities of MSWMA are: A. Solid waste disposal After specific authorization from all four members, MSWMA purchased a potential transfer station site on North State Street in 1996 to ensure that a suitable site would be available when needed. A project was designed for this site and a contract prepared for construction and operation. When the City of Ukiah chose instead in 1997 to develop the Taylor Drive project with Solid Waste Systems, MSWMA cancelled the North State Street project and assisted Ukiah in preparing a contract with Solid Wastes Systems. The new contract was largely built on the contract which MSWMA had previously developed. The North State Street site has been held in reserve in case the Taylor Drive project does not move forward. If directed by the concerned member agencies, MSWMA will once again proceed with a transfer station at North State Street. Otherwise MSWMA will finalize its arrangements to sell the property. B. AB 939 mandates & reports State law AB 939 put heavy new responsibilities on local governments to comply with recycling mandates, and to prepare reports and plans. MSWMA has provided all AB 939 reports and plans for its members, including the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan, and annual reports filed for each jurisdiction. To help Ukiah achieve compliance, MSWMA conducted a "Waste Generation Study" in 1998 which documented a recycling rate 10.9 percentage points higher than previously reported. This has put Ukiah within striking distance of reaching the 50% mandate for 2000. Currently, MSWMA is working closely with Ukiah staff to deal with the AB 939 impact of sewage sludge from the wastewater treatment plant. The city began removing the sludge in 1998. Some goes to municipal landfills, which counts as AB 939 "disposal." MSWMA will seek a revision of the Waste Generation Study to incorporate the annual sludge production as part of the AB 939 "base year" waste generation. If Ukiah falls short of the 50% mandate, MSWMA is prepared to file a request for a time extension for compliance, in accordance with the regulations of the California Integrated Waste Management Board. C. Recycling Promotion. Closely linked to the AB 939 compliance is MSWMA's recycling outreach program, underway since 1992. MSWMA publishes an annual "Recycling Guide," operates the Recycling Hotline (468-9704 or 800-246-3939), and maintains the recycling website at www.mendoRecycle.org. Canvassing by recycling specialists is carried out to encourage more businesses and organizations to use the recycling services of Solid Wastes Systems. Recently, the canvassers have emphasized apartment recycling and better school programs. Currently, MSWMA employs one part-time recycling outreach specialist, who is focussing on schools and county offices in Ukiah. D. HazMobile. Since 1996, MSWMA has operated the HazMobile household hazardous waste collection system. Of the 40 annual weekend collections for all of Mendocino and Lake Counties, 8 take place in Ukiah. Since the HazMobile's base facility is located on City of Ukiah property next to the wastewater treatment plant (under a lease), small businesses and others with special needs are accommodated by appointment. Together, these features mean the HazMobile gives Ukiah the best household hazardous waste service of any California city north of San Rafael. The State of California honored the HazMobile in 1998 as the "Outstanding Rural Program in California." A second award for "Program Innovation" was given in 1999 for the HazMobile's appliance hazardous wastes recycling program. The HazMobile program was created with a $120,000 grant from the California Integrated Waste Management Board, supplemented by MSWMA's own funds. This year, MSWMA was awarded another $76,000 grant, for acquisition of another truck and facility expansion. Plans for facility expansion will be presented to the City of Ukiah for approval in the near future. HazMobile participation has grown steadily since 1996: Fiscal year 9697 97-98 98-99 Vehicles participating 3,819 4,184 4,557 Change from previous year +10% +9% Pounds of hazardous waste collected 181,928 209,583 Change from previous year +15% + 16% MSWMA added a third HazMobile technician this year. The technicians also work on the appliance HHW program, electronics recycling program, and illegal dump cleanup programs. An important part of the HazMobile program is recycling latex paint. Most latex paint brought to the HazMobile is usable. MSWMA mixes this paint in batches, pours it into 4 gallon plastic buckets donated by Mrs. Dennson's Cookies, and distributes it free to the public. Since 1996, more than 20,000 gallons have been given away. E. Appliance hazardous waste recycling Dumping of refrigerators and freezers was reaching epidemic proportions because of the very high cost of disposal. MSWMA has reduced this charge to the public by providing free removal of "freon" refrigerant and oils at recycling centers throughout Mendocino County. The disposal charge to the public has dropped $10-20 per unit. Currently MSWMA is servicing about 200 units per month throughout Mendocino County. In Ukiah, refrigerators and freezers are accepted at Solid Wastes Systems' recycling center on Taylor Drive, F. Electronics recycling & other recycling programs Beginning in March 1999, MSWMA has provided free recycling for electronics items like computers, TVs, printers, and other office equipment. Drop-off points are maintained at the Ukiah landfill, South Coast landfill, and transfer stations in Willits, Caspar, Boonville, and Potter Valley. The electronics are consolidated by MSWMA in a marine shipping container at the HazMobile base in Ukiah, for shipment to China for recycling. There is no shipping cost to MSWMA. The program has been used heavily by households, businesses and organizations. To date, 120 tons have been recovered. This increases the AB 939 recycling rate and saves trash bills to the public. MSWMA has also helped create other recycling programs, such as gypsum board recycling at Ukiah, Willits and Caspar. MSWMA is providing drop-off litter and recycling drums to Ukiah High School, Willits High School, and Noyo Harbor. G. Illegal dump cleanup When time allows, MSWMA responds to illegal dumping complaints. Since January 1, 1999, MSWMA has cleaned up at 140 sites throughout Mendocino County. Jail inmates are used whenever possible to assist the technicians in this work. MSWMA also operates a program for reimbursing the landfill disposal fees of groups and individuals who do volunteer cleanup work. MSWMA coordinates the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day in Mendocino County, and is assisting a local group at reviving the Russian River Cleanup. MSWMA works actively to encourage prosecution of illegal dumping cases, and has proposed amendments to the State Penal Code to make prosecution easier. MSWMA also helps to secure state grant funding for larger cleanup projects. MSWMA plays a leading role in "holding the line" against illegal dumpins, in the face of a decade of soaring trash disposal fees. Controlling illegal dumping is a key public health and safety issue, as well as a quality of life and economic development issue for the tourist economy. 4 6. What is the advantage to Ukiah of MSWMA membership? MSWMA was created at the initiative of the City of Ukiah, because the city manager and council saw that local government cooperation was needed. MSWMA provides Ukiah with compliance with several state mandates, including household hazardous service, AB 939 reporting, and recycling public education and promotion. The cost-effectiveness of these services has been scrutinized repeatedly over the past nine years, and it has been shown that MSWMA is less costly than any alternative. MSWMA provides a forum and structure for cooperation with the county and other cities in dealing with solid waste problems. It gives Ukiah a tool to exercise countywide leadership. This was shown with the transfer station project, and again with new developments in the rapidly changing solid waste field. Through the JPA structure, Ukiah gains a measure of control over countywide solid waste concerns. Illegal dumping cleanup is an example. Around 1990, the County of Mendocino dropped its illegal dump cleanup program due to a general fund budget crisis. MSWMA stepped into the breach and built a replacement program, which is independent from general fund problems. Most of the cleanup work takes place outside Ukiah's boundaries, but MSWMA gives Ukiah a way to make sure it doesn't become an island surrounded by a trash-covered unincorporated area. 7. Recommendations The following are items which the City Council may wish to consider: A. Air conditioners & washers Currently, there is no place in the Ukiah Valley for residents to recycle air conditioners and washing machines. The landfill refuses them because of freon (in air conditioners) and oil (in washers). The City was successful in getting Solid Wastes Systems to accept refrigerators and freezers. If the company will also accept air conditioners and washers, MSWMA will provide HHW removal without charge. (MSWMA could also provide this service at the landfill). B. School recycling Schools are among the largest waste generators in the city. MSWMA believes more progress is possible at Ukiah schools, and this would help the City comply with AB 939. Strong leadership from the school district is essential. A letter, resolution, or personal appearance on behalf of the City, directed to the school district, could be valuable in stimulating more effort. (This was our experience in Willits.) C. Commingled recycling Following extensive study, MSWMA recommended that its member jurisdictions carefully consider commingled recycling collection. See the attached letter dated August 30, 1999. Based on experience elsewhere, a commingled system could bring enough additional in recycling to put Ukiah over the 50% mandate for 2000. enclosure 6 Mendocino Solid Waste- Management Authority A joint powers public agency Michael E. Sweeney General Manager P.O. Box 123 Ukiah, CA 954482 Telephone (707) 468-9710 Fax (707) 468-3877 rnesweeney@pacific, net August 30, 1999 Richard Shoemaker, Chairman Board of Supervisors County of Mendocino 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 RE: COMMINGLED RECYCLING COLLECTION Dear Chairman Shoemaker: The Board of Directors of the Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority held several discussions of commingled recycling collection and asked me to transmit information to our member jurisdictions on this subject. "Commingled collection" means all recyclables go together into a single container, usually a 65-gallon or 90-gallon wheeled plastic cart. This replaces the three-bin system used generally in Mendocino County today. Commingled collection is used for residential curbside recYcling and also for commercial customers like small businesses and apartment complexes. The advantages of commingled collection include: Increased ~)ublic convenience leading to more recycling. Cities that switched from a multiple-bin ~;ystem report an increase of about 20% in recycling tonnage. · The larger recycling cart allows a wider variety of recyclables to be collected. Small metal appliances, plastic bags, and styrofoam block are some recyclables collected in other areas that could potentially be added in Mendocino County. · A single recycling cart reduces the clutter of numerous'small recycling bins along the sidewalk. Since a mechanical arm is used to empty the carts worker efficiency increases and injuries fall. ' Disadvantages include': · Capital investment is needed for collection carts and mechanical arms or other equipment. , 000007 · Customers put some trash in the recycling carts by mistake. Intensive public education will minimize contamination. · The material recovery facility ("MRF") must be improved for the additional processing tasks. Commingled recycling seems to be the "wave of the future" in recycling. As the AB 939 deadline approaches numerous California cities are adopting commingled recycling. These locations provided information to MSWMA: · City of Alameda · County of Sacramento · Central Contra Costa County · City of Santa Barbara Empire Waste Management proposed commingled collection in return for a franchise contract extension to the City of Santa Rosa in June. The City declined the offer but the company says it will move ahead with plans for changes at its MRF. This MRF already serves much of Mendocino County. Richmond Sanitary Service will start processing commingled recyclables at its Richmond MRF in January, for recyclables from Richmond and Pleasanton. This MRF could handle commingled recyclables from Mendocino County, if a closer MRF isn't ready. The Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority recommends its member jurisdictions pursue the opportunity of commingled recycling collection. Please contact me if I can provide any additional information, or assist in any way. Sincerely, Mike Sweeney Manager CC: AB 939 Local Task Force MSWMA Board of Directors Paul Cayler, Solid Waste Division OOOO08 MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Wednesday, October 6, 1999 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on October 6, 1999, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:30 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku and Mayor Mastin. Councilmembers absent: Libby. Staff present: Director of Public Utilities Barnes, Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Assistant City Manager F!...a~!?" Personnel Officer Harris, City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport.~ili!i?:Com~ity Services Supervisor Sangiacomo, Planning Director Sawyer, §en.i~...r' Plann~i!i~:i' and City Clerk Councilmember Smith led the Pledge of Allegia~ 3a. PROCLAMATION: Week of October 11th'?~!!~E.FE Week ................ "' Mayor Mastin read the Proclamation designating..~':?'~ili~i~:..ctober 11, 1999 as Safe TREE Week. Nancy Rocca, representing aendocino ..:~~iii~d the '~~;~::'arigade, and Jane aendor, representing the Sonoma Cou~!i!~:['~i~:=.~..a....m, .a..~pted the proclamation. They explained that they will be pla .n.~i~'g tree.~ii?~i~:~:'~ii!~?.~i~:'lot next to the Library on South Main Street on October 16, !~9. Tr~iii~hief":~i!ii~duced and they discussed the role he plays during Safe Treeiii~ek wh~'by they:~i't' schools and provide education concerning the dangers of tre~iii~i:ng Io..~ed near..:~!~wer lines and other dangers. ......... · ;.;.:.:.:,:.:.: ..:.:::::.. - ............................................. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ================================================= Georg6~!::~~i!ili..N..orthe~ii~i~i~..ia Powe'~: Agency (NCPA) General Manager presented Council Wi~ii~~:t....i~n c.~:~~~.ii~PA. NCPA has 10 interconnected pool members, including Uk'i:~iiiiiiiiiiii.~... opei~[~ii?~i~?.;¥esources of those members, including Ukiah's ...:~.......×.:...:...:,..:.....:.....:.:.:...:.:...:.: ..... ============================ . resources to..:~:~..'~!:-Z.~~.s, and maximize benefits for all those members, and those costs · ..-::!:::: :i:::: ........... ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ":::' are the~::::i~"';~red ba'~ii~i~ii~::c...h of the members. He·.:..d...i~ssed...·.......... the reso~i!~' NCPA which consist of hydroelectric, geothermal, Western A~i?Power AdministF~:ion, Purchases, and Sales. The total load on an annual basis of U~i~h ............. is 106 gwh, .~ich is 106 billion watt hours. About half of that comes from the ~~.rmal powe[~::i~:hts that Ukiah committed to being part owner of about 10 years ago. ~iiii~..t..~:.l....a..r..:g~i~ount of supply comes from Western Area Power Administration, the {~~iiil.i~~ent. Ukiah has a long term contract with them, which was recently About 10 years ago when the power plants were constructed by the NCPA members it was estimated that the cost of oil would be $100 a barrel and wholesale power costs would be over 10.0 cents/kwh. At that time the members, including Ukiah, committed to build hydroelectric and geothermal power plants to beat those 10.0 cent prices. He discussed October 6, 1999 Page 1 of 17 how the forecast did not hold true and that oil is now less than $20 a barrel, and the price on the wholesale market for power is around 3.0 or 4.0 cents. NCPA also secures on the City's behalf a lot of power from Western that is.purchased for about 2.0 cents kwh. Market sales or purchases are around 2.5 cents. When you look at an overall cost of power to Ukiah from all these resources and the market, it's around 5.2 cents a kwh. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Mastin if the hydroelectric costs reflected on the slide includes Ukiah's hydro plant costs, Mr. Frasier advised that the costs reflect NCPA hydroelectric power that Ukiah owns part of as shown in an average water year. He discussed the annual budget of NCPA this year totaling $179.3 ~.i.l!ion...:~ii~iah's portion of that budget, which is a portion on the basis of its .o. wnershi~ii~i~ii~ower plants is approximately $5.2 million. Of the NCPA budget, 6~!!!!!;..s rep~!ii~by Debt Service which consists of municipal bonds that were issu~ii~'proxim~~rs ago, a..~ refinanced last year to build the power plants that ~ ow~ .... iiiiii!!? ....... ~!iiiii!iii!i!iiiii!iiii!iiiiiiiiiii~.....ii .... ::.ii!ii!ii!i?' The Califomia electric industry has been changin~!!~~~lly and tran"~~~:is one of the aspects that is changing the most. In the past,":ii~ii~.e:.r has been wh~"~:i'~d (a term for running the power through the P.G.&E. electr..~iii!~ii!i~:. Ukiah from your power plants). That wheeling has been through an inter~ecti~i~~nt with P.G.&E. This agreement ends in 2002 and P.G.&E. will be rep.,.!.~..,d, in that'::~ii~ii~!.ffornia Independent System Operator (ISO). NCPA continues to.::~~i~i~:with th~':'"'!i~ii~::Work out a no extra cost operation of the transmission syste .m...,ii~i::i~~ii~!~i::~.!:he ot~'-:¢ii~embers in the future. In the future it is not quite so clear what~;?cost .~ii!i!~i~!~i:i'ng the power into Ukiah, and into the other members, from th..~iii~sour~::i ..... ~ii!iiiiiii!iiiii?~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!i? .... tOon.e of!he more successful as~i!~; the.~;s that?~pA has done in the last year has ao w~th the federal govemm~:~nd e~ing th..e...i!~ntracts for the Western Area Power Administrati~n. The cost:.~ii~f ~t pow~ii~i~ii~:~:ents. It's Ukiah's lowest cost supply and for th.e. iii~ber mem~!~iii~ell. Th~ili~~cts have recently been extended for 20 years a~~~.......~nti~i~i~ii~'-:..~...v..ide fir~:~r hydroelectric projects. The term "firming" refers to ~~~:~n in~~~urance contract with someone so that if we do have a d~ year, ~~~!!~:provid'~~~::.Ukiah P G &E's contract to Drovid, firminn in 2004, sR:.::~'~'~~rentl:~}~;~'ng to ;ep~a;e t~at firming fac~l'it~'t~;~"P'~'~.~'~; Ton~h~r, Financi~~ to NCPA and employed with Paine Webber, advised that th~ency s debt res~'ring program w~s completed in the early podion of this year. ~guidance that.~s given by NCPAs members and staff was to improve the ~:etitiveness ~;~'e projects by reducing, in a strategic manner, the debt burden ~n {~~[0j~ts.~::~::~::"doing so, it would help to improve the competitiveness of NCPA s ~~~~. ,~other,,podion of the objective was to retire debt in a fashion which h'~i~~~:" the step-up exposure of members. That was ve~ impodant to the padicipants in the projects because the debt that was issued by NCPA to finan~ the proje~s is seared by ~ntracts with the project padicipants. The contacts provide that if one or more project padicipants default, other non-defaulting project padicipants have a legal obligation to in,ease their shares in the project to take up to an additional 25% of their shares. There was a concern on the pad of padicipants that going into the ~m~titive manet, as much should be done as possible to reduce the debt burden, and October 6, 1999 Page 2 of 17 the amount of debts so that their exposure was reduced as much as possible. In the course of restructuring the enormously complex refunding program which is now refunded virtually all of the economically refundable debt of all five of NCP^'s projects, they were able to retire $220 million of the total Agency's debt, using funds on hand as well as contributions from project participants. On a present value basis, the refinancing saved over $1 million for the City of Ukiah. More importantly, the savings were structured to provide meaningful debt service reduction through 2005 and then much more significant reduction in debt service from 2005 through 2010. The desire was to take as much of the savings as possible prior 0 and in particular, to accentuate the savings from 2006 onward. The co investor owned utilities, P.G.&E. reduces its rates in 2002..or allow members to fund rate stabilization funds to pre .p..~iifor or 2005, when competitive pressures are expected::~!i~"stron! have been able to accumulate cash balances te..!iiii~fer rate structure imbedded in the project debt service wo~ even more. that as the savings will Then by 2004 .. not o redu( out Mr. Frasier stated that just about every City having to keep rates at current levels in order to lower rates to be competitive at a later date. If you will find yourself out in the 2006 time having rates significantly higher for an NCPA are doing some version of a accumulate enough so that as soon dealt with the issue of fund in order to rate stabilization, sooner than that, at of the members of trying to get that fund to lowered to be absolutely competitive with the surroundin( ~ed util ~"and in this case, P.G.&E. He stated that it really comes d( the.::~i~'estion ..:~i?when do you want to' offer your customers rates that are at Mr. Frasie..~:..vised by..~~ii~to a rat~!!~ii~{~i'0n fund, Ukiah can build that fund over the ne~~i!!~i::~ive y~i!iiii!i~iiii~il....during '{~ii':'~i~i~{:i::~e frame that Ukiah will have to collect that money ;~iiii~iii~ in ;~':'"i!~~iiii::[..o' lower its rates to where it is competitive with the surr°unding::~i~~~nt. ~!~i~~ed NCPA's annual review of bond ratings and the concern of the~i~"."~ili::marke{:'~iiiiiiiiii? C°un~i!~mber aai'~ii~red as to the longevity expected for the geothermal plants, if we:~y that debt off i~ii!i~~rs, how much longer will they be operational after that debt ~i~~nse to an ,.~i!i~ from Councilmember Baldwin regarding the expected lOngevity ~i~~:~:!~:~~:i Mr. Frasier advised when the plants were originally built they were ~~i~ii~efinite in terms of the geothermal well. However, too many plants were b~!!i~ii~!i~thermal area, resulting in the plants capacity gradually reducing. Over the last couple years NCPA and Lake County have participated in a reinjection process where treated sewage is pumped to the plant site and actually injected into wells that were previously production wells. He discussed the injection process as it pertained to the project in Clearlake. They are finding that the steam that is coming up now is quite a bit cleaner. He clarified that "clean up costs" consist of removing the sulphur and arsenic. October 6, 1999 Page 3 of 17 He stated that the City is not alone in dealing with competition and the fact that P.G.&E. will be lowering rates very soon. That competition will be a very real factor that Ukiah will need to deal with, and other NCPA members are dealing with the same issue. Developing a plan to compete and putting together a rate stabilization fund so that in the near future Ukiah will be in a position to responsibly compete, having paid down its debts so that it can give the bond holders some assurance that Ukiah and the other members, together, will pay off those debts that were incurred approximately 10 years ago. NCPA expects at some point in the future most of the members will choose to allow customers to buy power from other than the City. The customer access issue hasn't been quite the volatile issue that we thought it would be a couple years ago. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Ashiku reg,..a, rding di~ii!~f hydroelectric power, Mr. Frasier advised that P.G.&E. has 5,000 ~wattS~i~~lectric plants in the Sierra's. They were planning to devest the..;iiii!i~{i're hyd..~iiiiii~:.roject to ..:~; unregulated subsidiary of P.G.&E. NCPA, and oth.'~, oppo~h~{ii~~...e..':.:.~f a....g.~:~t concem of the impact on the market for whOlesale ~r if th~!?~'S one ui:~i~i~~:i:'000 megawatts of hydroelectric they would, in fact, be ~ilt~:~hold power '~~~i~ times in order to manipulate the market, which would in i~i!i!i~'""A~::.our members. '~"G.&E. has now announced a plan to auction those same powe.r...:~~i~i!i!i!~CPA,s is still concerned with market power and have yet to be reassured t~ it ~:':'"~~i~i~e done in such a way that the markets won't be hurt, and hurt NCPA ~~rs. Se~~.PA thinks it is very important that public interest be carefully ~i~:.before'::~ili~i'ire auction process 4a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: R¢;'ular M~['ti~!~~i~mber 1,199£ MIS SmithlAshiku approving th..e...'iii~tes .~!i:i~e Re~:~:::~eeting of September 1, 1999 as presented; carried by the:~ii~ing .:r &ti call AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Uayor.:i~tin..N.~S: N~i!? ABSENT: Councilmember Libby. 4b. ~~AL O'~ii~~S: Re~i~eetincI of Sel3tember 1,199£ MIS Bal~:. ............. ~ Ippr(~~~....n..utes of the Regular M~eting of September 15, 1999 as presente~?.:.-"~ t h:'~'=-"~?~:::~:i"':~:'":~.".'"~i'':' .... ."..'~ ........ ~i~ !~ ng roll call vote' AYES' Co ' · ..... ~:~:~:~:~:~:~ ::::::::..:::::::::?:?: · · uncllmembers Smith - ........... ~...:i?:.:.~....~i% or M~. NOES. None. ABSENT: Councllmember Libby. Receive Pr;se~iati:~n and Conduct a Public Hearinu on the Concel~t Plan f¢ 8a~i!ili~:' ..... .~iii?:iiiii::iiiii::i: ~,.. ~Gobbi Stree.t.i!i~iverside Par!,'. Planner ~P advised that the City hired the firm of RRM Design Group to assist ~i~!i!~!~...i.~':~" Concept Plan for the Gobbi Street Riverside Park site. This process ~iii~~{~rviews with a variety of groups, organizations, and agencies, as well as int~~i!~i~i'izens. Staff has completed historical research, intensive field work to identify constraints and opportunities, and have had an on-going dialogue with surrounding property owners. A public workshop to scrutinize those alternatives was also included. Staff also prepared technical studies that included a traffic study, Biological Reconnaissance and Hazardous Materials Phase I Study, of which a Concept Plan was developed for a park. He discussed the background associated with the Gobbi Street October 6, 1999 Page 4 of 17 Riverside Park, as noted in the Staff Report. Issues which Staff encountered related to the project were identified as trespassing and vandalism on adjoining properties, traffic along East Gobbi Street and the possible disruption of the neighborhood in that area, impacts to habitat on the site and along the Russian River. Keith Gumee, consultant for the RRM Design Group, who worked on the project advised that his firm prepared three distinctly different alternative plans that were used in a public workshop to encourage public input, One alternative involved more ambitio~ al programming, another alternative was more passive, and anoth~ aggressive and included riverfront access and dredging a sectio the e into the sight and connect with the pond in the center of the sit~ a )se workshops, extensive analysis was completed on biotics, '~c " contamination. They arrived at a recommended Iram park with modest active public recreational opportul in of the site; providing enhanced riverfront access~i riparian co~ the Russian River; and providing for a passive use ret Irea in the center of the site centered upon an expanded pond feature. Cot; three areas would be a system of trails and paths which would also be an .the extreme southern portions of the property, in view of the need to a( against adjacent intensively used agriculture, staff has pro, at restoration area that will serve as a buffer between use areas of the park. His firm, and Staff, feel the propo~"'Plan and a reasonable compromise given the issues whi~~~:~se dur...i~"g ti- lops. Mr. Stump noted that staff has ~~ed .w.j~i?regular..::~dates to over 50 people who have e,,xpres, se.d interest in the p~t. Is~ raisg~iiii6y the Parks, Recreation, and golf g;omm~ss~:~;..consisted ~ili~.:r.:.a:~' one ~ii~[~iiii~er fields should be added, an inland harbor idealizes propo.s.~!i!ii~ the po~i~.i.~ii!~"a Dog Park being incorporated into this pr°ject::~i!~i~as ai~~all co~:':for long term funding for the development, mainten~i~ii~...s, ecu~'i~'~~!iiip....:ark. It is a Iow maintenance park, is heavy on the protection of:;~i~~.! ope~~!~Dd there is an emphasis on managing the traffic as it would com.e..::~'//~!ii~iii~k sin:~iii~e will be an increase in traffic. Upon ...q. ~i~'['ioning b~ii~~i~ember Baldwin as to why the Planning Department was the .i~ agency on ~ilili~ct rather than the Community Services Department, Mr. St.~p advised that t~: ~mmunity Services Department played an intimate role in the pt'"~ct, but the P.!~'ning Department became the lead department due to the i~~ntation of.~?General Plan. Staff had already developed a relationship with the ~~!~::.:...C. in~....e.~~y, and wanted to maintain that continuity. ~!~!~!iiiiii!i~;blic Hearing Opened. Marsha DePriest, Oak Manor resident, voiced her opposition to the proposed Park. She noted her concerns with increased traffic on East Gobbi Street, the possibility of contamination on the site, the need for a caretaker on sight, as well as flooding and drainage issues. October 6, 1999 Page 5 of 17 Ms. Steward, advocate for a Ukiah Dog Park, encouraged the City to provide for an off leash recreational area in the Gobbi Street Riverside Park for a Dog Park. Mary Lindley discussed the Concept Plan and expressed her concern that the Coastal Conservancy grant would restrict access to the park by children. She expressed concern with the City liability should someone be injured in the Park or accessing the river. Concern was also given for caretaker security and she felt the City cannot afford to maintain the Park. Tom MonPierre complimented Council for taking the lead in the design the Park. He was supportive of a Dog Park as part of the Conce g of David Riemenschneider, Ukiah, advised that as a Ukiah Valley Youth SOccer League, he is very supl Council approve a minimum of at least one socce of the in th{ of Directors r Mike McCann, 2040 Woodlake, approved of river forward with the project. encoura. to go Mr. Schultz, resident of Sacramento but owner his property would be affected by the prop. pedestrian and bike paths planned for the would infringe upon his property. He al Street, advised that concern with that the bike path ;1 the walnut trees on his property since they are..~ili~i'ose Concern was also expressed for privacy and security ei~hg the::~eet to two rental cabins that he owns. He also leases land f..~!i!~:~ viney~ and security concerns for his property. He was unsure if the~i!!~lan..s.: ~?purcha~: portions of his properties for Park use. ';~"'"~ :?' '::':::::::':: · -':':': ..... _City Ma~:~r....?...Horsle~i.i~~ that ai~~ii~!~"Mr Schultz's concerns ~-r,~,=,,-,~ ,~, o t., um¥::~j~iii~.arDy' ':a~ii!~iii~pt affect~'~l by the Gobbi Street Riverside Park plan. Dave Sage~~!ii~:...h' daPPle,ii!having a Park in the City with river frontage. He discussed a!l~i!~~....to er~i~?~i~e river in a safe environment and the importance of having a.::~{~:~":{":~ii~i!i~iii~se ~ an emergency and to act as a guide. Vick~ii~araway expr~i!:i~i;r dissatisfaction with the Concept plan and felt there is no n~!i~io have a Park in..i~e':~ast Gobbi Street area. She also expressed her opposition to r.~iaccess and in~sed traffic to the area. ~~i~..J...O...h...!3..s..~i!ii!~wner of Johnson Orchards, located south and west of the proposed ~i~~ he is happy with the comprehensive plan and with the passive approach to':~!ii~i~:tivities. He expressed concerns with allocating funds to maintain the Park in future years, maintaining security of the Park, providing a resident caretaker for the Park, the possibility of erosion of river banks due to flooding, deterioration of paths due to excessive use by the public, and maintaining access to the river while protecting riparian habitat. 8:12 p.m. - Public Hearing Closed. October 6, 1999 Page 6 of 17 8:12 p.m. - Recessed. 8:24 p.m. - Reconvened. Discussion followed concerning the estimated cost of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project and Mr. Stump advised that it would be impossible to estimate the cost of such a document. However, if Council felt a need, a smaller EIR could be completed, based on the conclusions regarding issues identified in the Negative Declaration. He further advised that $80,000 in grant money received from the Coastal Conservancy is earmarked for specific purposes. He emphasized that staff is still recommending the adoption of a Negative Declaration for the project...&= .... Upon an inquiry by Councilmember Baldwin concerni.n.g the is~~.~:~, sheds and of the existing blackberries, Mr. Gurnee explained that t.h..~iiiJs a I~iii~....te. tion and small clearings within the site, and that area would be en~~d with..~~~.~[picnic ar~: and river overlooks. By working with the native veg~tion in t~'"::~r~i~~::cleal~i~:~, it should be a very attractive aesthetic element. T~i~i::will i .n~;~le trimm~ii~i~'~ to allow for enhanced views of the river. The pond in !i~iii~t.:6r ........... of the site ~~iii~ome a very attractive feature with an Oak and Redwood tr~ilj atJve plants ga'~:den, and a system of paths going around it. The backdrop t.O....~!ij~iii!~iiii~f that portion of the park would be an ecological preserve area which wouldi!!ij~clu~!!!~iij~!ii~::~,ative vegetation. He noted that the blackberries would be used in a~e.nt fenc~iii~iii~iiiincluded along with Further discussion followed concerning.:~::Poss~i~[i~i~.,.~::, improvements along the river corridor in order to make the~::i~i~er mo~?'vis'i'~j!~!ii~!ii!~rs, with emphasis on the aesthetics of the corridor. Upon an inquiry by Mayor M~i~ with .~rd t,~..:!.j~::ility issues regarding the Park, City Attomey R~port advis~...d'iii~!:' in gen~!iiiii~iiiG~" liability would arise from the statutes which m..a.~ii~i~.p, ublic ..e..~ili~ the Ci[~iiij~j~)r maintaining a dangerous condition of public ~!i!iiii. f. the~:~ili~ii~ila.angero~:~:~:~:~ndition. There are a number of elements in those st~:i~ii!~j'?:ip..:.rovicJ:~ii~iii~ ......with potential immunities if they properly review and approve the"::~":~~ii~..t is u~i~iiiii~e are other statutes which typically provide partial immunities [~iii~ii~ii~ke r~J]'°nal lands available for public use. If Council wants a more D~J:~'~"'~J~~ili~:.0...f wl3'~t the potential liabilities would be, he would be happy Ci.~iiii~anager Horsl~i!!b~ised that staff is in contact with Santa Rosa and Healdsburg, ii~th have riversi~' access. Staff has been talking with them, as well as REMIF, and ~:,.information.::~JliJ' be presented to Council before any decisions are made on the ~iiiiii~....f...~ij~iiJ'".~ks very positive and staff will provide this information along with the ~!ii~~i!~iii~port at a future date. Discussion followed concerning issues raised concerning the paving of East Gobbi Street, the width of the lanes, and the public right-of-way as it relates to installing a narrow bike path. It was noted that the intent was to avoid trees and utility poles along the corridor. Mr. Gumee discussed the matter of a Dog Park and noted there is ample room to include it at the site. He recommended it be located on the edge of the environmental restoration October 6, 1999 Page 7 of 17 area to the south of the Park. City Manager Horsley noted that Various alternatives are available for a Dog Park and the City has been in contact with other cities who have such parks and will be obtaining further information on their design. undetermined at this time. The City does not have the mo. ney time and it will be a very long process, completed ictii~.ase assured that improvements made now will be maintai~"~s well security. Mr. Stump discussed the concept of "bulb-outs" as it relates to slowing traffic. In response to an inquiry from Councilmember Smith concerning a cost estimate for the project, Mr. Stump explained that the Coastal Conservancy has $80,000 for grant funding. The funding would go towards the cost of fencing and buffering of agricultural habitat restoration, erosion control along the river, and public a~ ":' costs are the Park at this City can be n for pr~ In response to an inquiry from Councilmember Bali parking spaces, Mr. Gumee advised that there are added to the Park proposal, such as the soccer fiei reconfiguration of the baseball diamonds. Staff where parking will be provided and 158 s of the facilities be used. As a result of the to all parties involved in the planning of staff has conceived the buffer zone g However, there would be environrr The area would be an education; discussed the width of buffer zo couh In respons~i~:.t..0 a comme the river the en is would good uses inunda g the ~for 158 active uses that have been ional t-ball field with the to try to define areas be Jnt, should all is a compromise the way in which not be allowed entrance. available with the schools. )e accessed with permission. He providing restoration purposes. regarding Mr. Johnson's concern that ~g the year, Mr. Gurnee advised that zone. The new structures that are proposed out of harms way. For the most part, parks are facilities that are there will be able to withstand In res to an ember Smith with regard to staffing of a caretaker on Mr. Stump ideas have been discussed, however, nothing definite h .a...~iii~een established. Ia~"would contact other cities regarding information on the matter. .................. :~ ,:!::iii!? .:~iii~i.-'..:!i~!~: .::~,~:~::. iAum.enoted:..-..:~e of the comments made during the Public Hearing process, and ~~.'.e.!,d,..:.:.:~.~U~i!i~f the specific policies in the General Plan regarding what should be ~~~!!~rk. Security was one of the major concerns addressed in the planning e~!ii~ii~'~tacting other communities, the City will be able to find a plan that works for Ukiah. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Baldwin concerning the pond area formerly being used as a dumping ground for the Public Works Department, Mr. Stump explained that the Public Works Department has been depositing leaves at the pond location and October 6, 1999 Page 8 of 17 other vegetative debris. There are some cement blocks at the location, and they would be removed so as not to create a hazard. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Mastin regarding testing of heavy metals in the area, Mr. Stump advised that testing has not occurred, but would be part of the next step, should the Concept Plan be approved. The study does suggest taking a few core samplings, although it is speculated that the area is completely safe. Mr. Gumee addressed a statement made during the Public Hearing with regard to a Tot Lot being located in an area where there is contamination. Apparently where there is potential lead contamination is from the shooting range southern portion of the site, which is a distance from the site of the Tot LI Councilmember Ashiku was of the opinion that the ~ii~'"ihe re= a should be decreased. He is concerned about the prospect ~ii~emovin. view shed of the river, concern with the riparian river. Staff should be very careful in approaching Dog Park and recommended providing buffer zon~ avoid conflicts. impact the He was ye of a interest in order to Mr. Stump advised that the Native Plant Socit Williams, has been involved in the plan. Mr. Williams h~ Iaff Plan Society is very excited about removing some of damaging the native riparian vegetation. Depending upon if a significant number of plants are used to protect the soil.~!i!!i~eplanti~:"of vegetation would be needed. There is a need for rev.~ation i~i?~any areas. Mayor Mastin liked the Conc~{iii~lan, .b..'~ever, .b..~iii~xpressed a concern with traffic and for people walking and bi~ ~!i!~nd fro~iii~!?'he was supportive of river access and felt the P.~iiii:S:..someth~i!~.{'i!i~e can ~i!~iii~ attractiveness of our City. Councii~ii~'..m..ith ~:~~!ii.'.a..:Dog Park and felt that the City should work with the native C°uncil~~'~?~~~i!i~O. cou'~ged people to visit the site and noted that the Park is very ~i~:~y due to fr~~ii~ffic. He posed the option of trading some of this land for pro~ at the Perkins'!i~{~i~iHangle and thereby leave 10 acres at the Gobbi Street site for.....iiii~!~tive recreation..~ii~e'"~ould also like Council to set aside money for Council to visit ~i~nd, Oregon, th~i!~ities of Redding, Chico, Shasta City, and Fortuna in order to find ~ii~.at other co~~ities have done to construct beautiful river parks. He preferred not i~i!~ii~::..P.....r.?~iii~ce m e a I. M~~"'"~:"expressed concern with traffic and would like to see further plans for Gobbi Street as it relates to the project. He suggested that staff may consider the installation of a primitive pathway along the river because it most likely will be washed away each year. Although he expressed a concern for funding the project, he recommended that the project continue to move forward. He was supportive of a phased program for improvements to the Park. October 6, 1999 Page 9 of 17 Councilmember Baldwin was of the opinion that the project will be expensive and that funding needs to be secured to maintain the Park properly in future years. He recommended the passive recreation area include a Dog Park, and recommended including another soccer field. Mr. Stump advised that staff needs to make sure that the leases that are signed with the BMX track and the Little League stipulate maintenance of the lands. Discussion followed concerning leases and maintenance of the parks, Little League field, and the BMX property. He discussed possible grants available for pedestrian and bicycle access along Gobbi Street, as well as traffic calming improvements. In summary, Council was supportive of a Dog Park on th.:e site, the southern portion of the site. Consensus of Council was to red .u.~ii~e ec~~iiii~..e..storation~- in the souther portion and making it a passive area, assessa~:~:~*~ the p.~i~!~~cil approv..~ of the idea that maybe in the Plan it can talk about~i~i~ening a:...:~i~ai":~~i~i![o, the....r.:.:~r, but without damaging the riparian corridor. Overatii!iii~.poss~:i'' to be more beautiful. There was also consensu~ii!~B.t.i!i~:e detail with*~~ili!~:~y are addressing speeding and traffic along East Gobbi St~iiiiii~r:e was also som~"~onsensus about constructing a primitive path along the river..~i~i~i!~nnect the access points but not be disruptive to the riparian corridor. Cou~i:i' al'~iii~~..consensus regarding the addition of a Dog Park in the southern porti~:::of the .... ~.~!i!i?:iii::?:ii?:i::ii?:iiii?:i::?:iiiii::i::ii?:i::ii~ .... "::!!i~i~i~i~i~i~::~::~i~!!::~i~i~~'' City Manager Horsley advised that the.~!ii~i~iii!i~iii~i~Bt,s avaii~i'e for open space and staff will be seeking further informatio.~iiii~:~:'that 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION~i~i!? ..:~? :::::?::::?:: ....... ........ ~!!i::::::!il~ Mayor Mastin reviewed the a roc ..... .,::::::::::.' MIS Smi..t~~iku~::.?:...::::.. ap....~i~!iij..t:ems a ~~~iii~::;f tho Consent Calendar as follows: a. AP~ili!i~end~:~!ii~iiiiii~!~99-2000"'"'Fiscal Year Budget for Construction of Fire b. Adopted ~~~::.No. i':~ii~hding City of Ukiah's PERS Contract to Remove the Exclusion-:~iii:~Jili~By Rat~::~:~'Hourly Basis Emplo ees', Pros ective Onl : ............ ~::::::::~!::: ..... ~i~::::::.::~: ...... i.:. .~::ii ....... Y P Y. c. Appre~ECo~J:~iii~i..t..'~::~CreatJ've Landscaping for Landscape Services on Seminary ............. ::~i::iiiiii::iiiii::i::::iiii::i::iii::iiiii?:i?:i::i~ ...... d. ~roved Sudge!!!iii~!~dment to Authorize Expenditures in Fund 140, Park ./:ii~velopment Fund~ii? ...... ===================== ..::~:i:!:]::" · .:::::::::;:· ~i~otion carrie..::~ii~ the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, ~~i::i~and. M~::"Mastin. NOES' None. ABSENT: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN' 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Tim Rickle advised that the outside lights were not on so as to focus on the flag at night in front of City Hall. City Manager Horsley advised that staff will look into the matter. October 6, 1999 Page 10 of 17 NEW BUSINESS Da. Consideration and Adoption of Resolution A_oprovinp Understandin_= for Em_oloyee Barpaining Unit - Police Unit MIS Ashiku/Smith approving Resolution No. 9@-16, Adopting Understanding Between the City of Ukiah and the Ukiah Police Unit. Memorandum or Memorandum of Councilmember Baldwin was of the opinion that the City cannot afford the pay raise at the current time and that the City chose the wrong comparison counties. Staff should be comparing with counties to our north and to our east. He did not know the City is going to pay for this, except by allowing our planning process to b~ '~'' need for more revenue. He did not support the MOU at the curr....e..nt time Councilmember Ashiku stated that our officers wor the City has made it a priority to put public objectives. It's important that the Police De find a way to support this additional cost to the bL as and raise an( will Mayor Masfin advised that he has been asked by into the record during open session regarding "1 respectfully request you read the conte hearings begin on the issue of the resolul Please offer a copy to my fellow co~ ng Libby to read her letter lution. at the time Police Department. media in the event clarifications of my comments is need~; Tha~ Mr. Mayor. As my colleagues are aware, !:~i!~ve be~~:' council's closed session meetings regarding this resolutio~ii?.iiiiii?~ave .~e it kn~n my desire to be present and to vote on this issue. Unfortunate!~!iii~ ne~ii~tions ~ied to the date I was scheduled to be away. I have ~ed with C.....~ii!:~l Coun~i~i~i!ii~)port, and been advised there are not any pro.v:i~ for a.~iiiii~~....ee vote~iiii!iiiiii!~ili!~ strong feelings on this issue and an wo :i'a?¥ii e to take this opportunity, with you help Mr. Mayor, tO':~~ii~y The pay"'~~~ii![eques'i~ii~ii~able when compared to requests we usually see. I cannot .ig~ii~ii~iS.p. arit~!~~en what wee pay our police officers and what they can rece.[...~ii.~i:~::~ii~ii!i'.~iii.o....~her'~:~eas. It appears police pay in past years has been put on the::~ burner, t~ii~~i~ their desire to get a little closer to what peers are making and.::~at is fair comp~~ for the job. ::~iiii~ring the past ~ ~:0nths I have done "RIDE ALONGS" with police department ~nnel as they ~ out their jobs. ~iiii!i!i personal c i' sions are we have an investment in a group of police officers that ~ aid not.::.t...e~?i ig ht ly. "":iii!iii!iii!{ii!~ii~ii!~ii!~ublic wants trained and experienced officers. I believe the public also W~!~~:'"io be members of the community. Many officers are raising families in this community and consider this community their home. We have already lost officers to outside areas because they required greater compensation to support their families. I ALSO believe it is important officers and the community bond together. That is not possible if we have a revolving door because compensation is below standards. In my opinion, police work is not for everyone. It requires training, experience, and I feel it is very important to have the right temperament. October 6, 1999 Page 11 of 17 During my "RIDEALONGS", an officer was called a "PIG" by young children. The officer is trained to maintain professional and mature conduct, above standards we would expect of those whom are not officers, or not qualified to be officers. There was an arrent for violation of a restraining order during a domestic situation. It was repo'rted the individual was known to sometimes carry a gun. The arrest was made without physical harm to any party. It is experience and professionalism that makes this possible. During my most recent "RIDEALONG' a hate crime was reported, and a suspect was later apprehended. We are not isolated in Ukiah from serious crime. A daily log of police activity was recently reported in the local newspal" These activities often have the appearance of being minor in n~ times they ARE minor in nature, compared to serious crime. ..::~;:. Many times they are minor because of the It is often the mindset to call the police, rather than to dis This is ~ system and can be the difference between violen~ a m' "::::::::::' And just around the corner, an officer never kr~ may threatening situation. I support a well-trained, experienced police the idea of officers who are good neighbors and active members of the communi, and retraining IS AN EXPENSE and does not serve the community. -:.:::ii!i!? I would also like to add we are not the quiet1 were. The tight boundaries of our city limits can be dece' much 15000 enter the city daily. Many that come off the to the county. While I do not see Ukiah as dangerous in ti ..... we have a need for experience and stability in our polic.~i!i~rce in encies arises. This security for our citizens ~i!!~!i~quire.:.~ it receive compensation in line with their professional rol~iiiiii!]~ retu~ii!i~e as a ~ will continue to ask the best from our police officers. .~!ii~ii!i!? ..... ::!iiiii?~iiiii!i!: ..::~iiiii?~' , As a city::.we cannot aff~d ~!?~ the ~~~~i~lice dep,artment. And I don t believe that shou~iii~er be o~ii~l:..iiiiiiiili! do belJ~iii~iii~iiiii~ the citizen s best interest we do better than we...'ii!i~ii!~en d~i~ii!iiiiii~:,can a~:::'i~'~ending priorities in order to accommodate what I b~i~iii~i!~..acc~{~:?i!.~i~,ti~act under the circumstances. Respectfull'~::ii~~iiiii~'-athy l"'~iiii~t3 City Council Member" Council~~i~ii~!~ii~as ~::i~e opinion that the City will never be able to compete with th~ii!i~:~laries of '~i?~i!~oma, and Matin Counties due to the cost of living being hig~i!~n those areas:iiiii!~iiii~'ousing prices in those areas are significantly higher than Uki~' and that has s~'"ei:~:i'ng to do with why salaries are greater. He felt a comparison s.~ld be made wit.b.'iii~ake, Trinity, Humboldt, .Shasta, Colusa, and Del Norte Counties, i~ing the CPI..::~:' this area, with other private businesses, and with other public ~:....~~s in t..h..~::i~a. He also perceived that this decision could cause some problems ~ii~i!~?i~i~/ee units within the City. He questioned whether the City can afford a 2~!ii~.i~ase over the next four years. Mayor Mastin agreed with Councilmember Baldwin that it is difficult for the City to afford this raise and to compete with other cities. It was easier to compare the City of Ukiah with Lake, Humboldt, and Trinity Counties and still expect that we would be able to be competitive in the field of public safety. That includes the Police and Fire Units, since they are both highly trained, and we have had a problem over the past few years in both units October 6, 1999 Page 12 of 17 with keeping well trained professionals. He was unsure if it benefits either department, the City, or its citizens to have continual turn over in these departments and to potentially always having to hire officers with little or no training, or right out of the academy. This puts a strain on the other officers in the department when it comes time for back up or emergency decisions that need to be made. He did not know how the City will be able to sustain the raise over the next couple years with other units. Councilmember Baldwin inquired if the Police Unit is aware that one of the possible ways to pay for this raise is to reduce positions that we currently have in the Police Department. ..::!::.. Councilmember Smith advised that in the agency which he worksiiii.--.h..e e~nences much the same problem in that they loose staff to the cities Io .c~..ted to ~i~~:::'0f Ukiah. They ,never go to, Humboldt or Lake Counties, but rather sou.t..~ii~us~ii~i~ili~etter pay there. Councilmember Ashiku stated for the record tha~ii~....ese .a....~i~{:~e sam~"'"~i~~ii~:~e of which worked along with the rest of the City employ&~i~~:=~'he City fell u~ii~'"'times, and they did not receive increases in pay. This is =:~i!i~!i~i~ying back to the~' what they have been entitled to ..... ?:iiii!iiii~iiiii!~i~i!~!!i!ili~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii{iii!~::.. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: A~::i~..:..Counci'i:~~ii~$mith' Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: Councilmember..::~i~iiiiiiiiiiii~ABSE~iiiiiii~ncilmember Libby. ABSTAIN' None. 9b. Consideration of App.~~ent..~i~:? Vacar!..~y on the Traffic Enc~ineerinn City Clerk Ulvila advised that:~i~:~tice o.f....~!~!~acan.~ii~i~ the Traffic Engineering Committee was notice..d..~?:to the medi.a, iiiih:..~ Ukiah~i~iiiii~i~!!!~:~e deadline of September 20, 1999 to receive..::~i~tions.:~!i!i!!i!i~i!!~ne ap~i~~iiii~:~as received prior to the deadline, as submitt~i~ii~.min *~~~::..The V~ncy occurred due to the resignation of Donna Roberts, ~ilili~~...d as '~*~i!!ii~i~iiiii~...e...sident representative on the Committee. Staff is recommendir~ii~~!::~::..adop{::~iii~~ion appointing Benjamin Kageyama to the Traffic MIS .~;ikulBaldwi~!iii!i!i~~hting Benjamin Kageyama to the Traffic Engineering Co~i~ee; carried by ~?:i~i~Wing roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, A~U, and Mayor M~ini:" NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN' ~ii~[~i~*iey advised that a Traffic Engineering Committee meeting is scheduled f~!i~!~i!~l staff will provide Mr. Kageyama with information relative to the meeting. NEW BUSINESS 9c. Review of Proposed League of California Cities' Resolution~ City Manager Horsley reported meeting with staff and discussed the proposed resolutions. On Resolution No. 2, staff felt very strongly that tobacco money should be distributed among cities as well as counties. Staff discussed allocating the funds towards October 6, 1999 Page 13 of 17 broadening community and youth services. Councilmember Smith reported that the Mendocino County Health Council has taken the position that money derived from the passage of the tobacco settlement be spent on health care needs and gaps in services for older adults and individuals with disabilities. He preferred that the money be allocated towards elderly and disabled individuals health care services. The Mendocino County health Council is supportive of the resolutions. City Manager Horsley discussed Resolution No. 10, Local Control Over Group Homes with Six or Fewer Clients, and it was noted by Planning Department st.~ that there currently are no control over small group homes within the City Li~i. ts....~.~iiiiiiiiiiiiii~ .... There was discussion by Council that group homes.::~.'S.t go-~~ilLa..:..state licensing process. It was also noted that many homes with ~~::i'han fiv.~ii~~ii~[e., licensed..~ Community Care. Council questioned whether th~iii~oposed:~o'i:~i~!~. ~pts ~p City Manager Horsley noted that Resolution No. 'i~i~ili~..tive Ordinance?':~:~0cedures, does not pertain to the City of Ukiah. It was the cons:.e..'~iii~!!~?f that Resolution No. 16, Support for Police, Fire and Local Government $~ice:*~~ii::~itiative, is a laudable goal. Discussion followed concerning the amou.Qt::~ual to ~ii~i~::total sales and use tax revenue collected by the State of Califor. B~iii~~i?:..'..e. ach fi~ii~' being deposited in the Police, Fire and Local ,.:.:.:.:.:.. ....,...,. Councilmember Ashiku opposed ~i~olutiol3~iilhoi"::~i?i~ii!~!i~)ncerning fluoride in water supplies. - Councilmember Baldwin had..,:i~stions.:::i~cerniDg'"ii~esolution No. '16 with regard to how it will work ~.~... d who will ~jd~!~how m~ili~?:i~~y will be under the control of the City Council .a..~ii!~w muc.b..~!::~iiiii~i!!.'".directly &iii i!i :i:ice and Fire Departments. Mayor i~:-~{i~iiiii~:..stion~ii!~iiiiii~g:ic concerning Resolution No. 6, Forest Products Consens~iii~i~i~~i!~.'.'.a..r. din~i~e Resolutions was: Yes: ~lutions 1, ~iiii~iii~ii!i~ii!ii6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. M~i?information neea~'di""~!~esolutions 10 and 16. ~iiiiii~Ew BUSINES~~? ~!i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiililntrodu.c-_-ti*'~=:"of Ordinance Amending the I, Ikiah Municir~al Code Section 7160, :;:::iiiiiiiii!iiiiiii!iii!iiiiii~~i~a Parkina Restrictions on Citv Stree!-~ - c'~i!i~~y Rapport ad-vised the proposed (~rdinanc~ is an outgrowth of meetings among City staff who are concerned with enforcing the Parking Ordinance. He reported that system for enforcing parking violations is an internal City process. If a person disagrees with a citation, they can go through an administrative hearing process and eventually obtain a decision from the City concerning the violation. He discussed the confusion among City officials concerning enforcement of parking restrictions. October 6, 1999 Page 14 of 17 He reviewed the City Resolutions that address parking restrictions, as noted in the Staff Report. The proposed amendment to Section 7160 of the City Code is intended to clarify how the parking restriction applies. It provides a default rule that will apply, unless the resolution establishing the parking restriction establishes a different rule. He reported that the consensus among City staff, which is reflected in the proposed revision to the Ordinance, is if there is a parking restriction it would apply on the side of the street where the sign, or marking, giving notice of that restriction is set within that block of that street. He discussed the proposed amendment further, with various parking scenarios. City Manager Horsley explained that 1'0 years ago there was a real e~sis on the problem with employees parking on School Street and taking up..~sto~:~,paces. The rules applied at that time focused on limiting employees from pa~~i~""ihose locations for great lengths of time. Staff has negotiated parking .p...~s for~~i~d Court House employees, the jury duty parking has been resolved,~!iiiii~ is no~~i~.:..o..n custom~~ parking in the downtown area. The proposed Ordin~ will m~ii'"'"'~U~{~~.r..:..k..ing downtown area more flexible. The Ordinance will c~ing ~:'the cit~:'"~i~i~rce Councilmember Smith related a parking incident ~..d. with him and his wife in the downtown area recently. -:~iiiiiiil?~' City Attorney Rapport noted that staff is ~i~i~~...ng to ;~~iiii~'e substance of the Ordinance, but merely explaining how t~!i~::~....~!i!~i!::...a, pplie~?iii~e discussed methods of detecting parking violations. He dis~ed hi~iiii~~.t..~?:?~)f the current Ordinance, compare it to the Resolution which e.~:i31ishe~ii~e r~~~"which lists the streets, the Ordinance implies that the restri~i~' appli..e..'~?:~)n the ~:i" or a portion of the street that is designated in the Resolution..~!iiiiiiii!iiiiiiiii~i!i~: ..:~::iiiii?:~ Jimmy Ri~el, owner o.~ii::~:H~an se~'"i~::~::~?:i....!?~iiiii~i~!West::~::':~::~' - '::'"" Perkins Street, discussed his observati~!i!~ncerni~i~~ with th~ii~~¥1" He discussed his parking habits in the downt~i!i!!~?nd ~?~ii~i!~:~.opini0~i~i~{~'t the proposed Ordinance does not go far enough i:~ii~~::parki'~ii~i~i!!iiD..O...~t only for the local business community but for the needed visi{~i!~ii~::~:downi~iii~i~ss district. City Mana~ii~~ii~a.'.med"~i~t the Downtown Merchants had previously requested 90 mi~::parking in'"""~ii~town area. However, should they feel the need to change that..:.ti~:e limit, they n~ii~!!i~:~'esent a proposal to staff for consideration. ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: .,,:,:.:.:. ~~cil discussed..:~e proposed Ordinance and the hearing process with the City .:.:.:,:.:.:,:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:.:.. ..;::::::::::::~' ~ii~~~in to introduce by title only Ordinance of the City Council of the City of U'~i~:Jng Section 7160 of the Ukiah City Code which authorizes parking restrictions on City streets, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN: None. City Clerk Ulvila read the Ordinance by title only. October 6, 1999 Page 15 of 17 MIS AshikulBaldwin to introduce Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah amending Section 7160 of the Ukiah City Code which authorizes parking restrictions on City streets, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Libby. ABSTAIN: None. NEW BUSINESS De. A_o_oroval of Contract with Nickolaus and Hae_o for Labor Relations City Manager Horsley advised that this matter is scheduled for discussion during Closed Councilmember Smith reported attending a ....... ~:::::?"' ':"'~:::::~:::::::?'::'"""~:'""'~'"'"'~::..C o u n t y Heal~. Planning Council today in which he voiced his conc~::'{or elde.~!~i~~~!ed citiz .e......~' On September 27 he attended an UCOe meetingi!i~ Counc~.t.~ml~'~iii~~alt~'e. There was discussion concerning various TEA g~:..app!~'ions and'::~~i~:~)t to clarify various issues relative to the grant package~!iiiili~ii~chnical AdviS~~mittee (TAC) had made a recommendation to MCOG for a '~i~ii~.l. an for funding. The staff at MCOG is opposed to this recommendation on the b~!ii~ii~AC, used criteria other than on the technical rating sheet. It will come to a:~::ii~i~te ~:~ili~ili~A:v..ember meeting. He reported that he met with Councilmember Libby....:~::~G.i.~ i and Assistant City Manager Flad regarding these issues ..... ~!iii!iiiiii~!iii~iiii!iiiiiiiiii!iiii!i?~iii~::, ..~....:~.::.~::. Councilmember Ashiku report.e~ii~i~t he .a.'~'nded a~i?"~:~'PA meeting in Tahoe recently and found it very informative i~!i~:ill m...a..~"a compi~ii'e report at the next meeting when all Councilmembers are prese~ii~::He re~d that?:~est Coast Wings has secured 100% financing for.., their proje~!i!!a.t ~i~ Airpo~!!i~ii!~e combination of an EDFC loan and financing:~iiSavings~,i~~!ii~ii~hey wili!!i~~?to move forward with their project which is expe~!~ii~::.com'~i~ii~ii~e earl~:~::~:~rt of next year. Mayor Ma~:~i~iiii~:.e..d th~iiii!!i~ili~hded a,n MSWMA meeting in Willits. Questions regarding t~iii!i~~ilili~.t.-ation"::~?bSWaA s concern that the transfer station be in operatio..~iii~::'~iov~~i~i~ml~r 2000 were addressed. MSWMA had some questions regardi~' the status 0fi~i!~ct which he attempted to answer. MSWMA approved the Haz~bile schedule ~~ii~ear 2000 which will include the addition of locations in Potter V~i~ and Hopland. :.:.:.:-:,~ ~!!ii~.'...e. ptember 3...0...~!iii~'TA met in Fort Bragg. One item of discussion concerned closing ~ii~i~[~!~~ Dial-A-Ride in the evenings because of Iow ridership. Due to public ~ii!~"has deferred the matter until next month. Other items discussed by MTA w~i!ili~i!~i'ah Transit Center and TEA grant applications, of which MTA has applied. They also discussed purchase and sales agreements and will meet tomorrow with NCRA concerning these agreements. They anticipate having these documents signed by the end of the month. He discussed Woodland School, which is located at the site of the former Mariposa School, and their request that MTA provide bus service to their school. MTA unanimously October 6, 1999 Page 16 of 17 denied their request due to the fact that the school is located 1.7 miles on a dirt road and MTA's internal policy is to not run buses on dirt roads due to wear and tear on the vehicles. However, a solution to Woodland School's request may be solved by working with the School District and submitting a RFP for contracting for a driver for a school bus. 11. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR REPORTS City Manager Horsley advised that Grace Hudson Museum was awarded a $50,000 grant. She explained informational material that she distributed to Council. City Clerk Ulvila reported attending a meeting on September 24, 1999, e[ii~e Northern California Division of the City Clerk's Association in San Ramon. :~..b.e h~li~"een meeting with each of the City's Departments concerning Recor..ds Rete~ii~' noted that the current Records Retention Schedule was adopted i~iiiii~i;.9..80. '"~:_.~i!i~iiiiii~e presenting .a revised Records Retention Schedule to Council bef.:~?:':'"~e CLOSED SESS,O. a. G.C. {54957.6- Conference With Employee Unit: Fire Unit Negotiator: Candace Horsley b. Confer g; Employee Unit: Police.:.!ii~it Negotiator: C a nd a~iii~":0rs I ey:~iii? :~iiiiiili ............... No Action Taken. ::~ ....... .q~::~::..G.C. 6549~,9.:~,,1,- ~~~i; With Leaal Counsel Reaardinn ..... ~!i!iiiiiii!iiiiii!iiiii~iii~i~~n- ExJ~i!~iii~i:~:igation- 1 matter: - - ':~ili!i!iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~~oo~'::~~~ii~ark v. ~'i'i~Y of Ukiah, Mendocino County Superior Court 9~iiii~? Ap_oroval of C~tract with Nickolaus and Haeg for Labor Relation¢ ~ii~mith/Ashiku ~'oving contract to retain negotiators of Nickolaus and Haeg for Fire ~i~iii!i!'.a. bor nego..:t...!~ns; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES' Councilmembers ~i~ii~iiiii!~.~t~iiiii!Ashiku, and Mayor Uastin. NOES: None. ASSENT: Councilmember None. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk October 6, 1999 Page 17 of 17 ITEM NO. 6a DATE October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 1999 Payments made during the month of September 1999, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedules of Bills, representing the four (4) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 18088-18191, 18336-18527, 18650-18761 Payroll check numbers: 18192-18335, 18528-18649 Direct Deposit numbers: 5972-6158 Void check numbers: None This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the month of September 1999. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Gordon Elton, Director of Finance Coordinated with: Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Attachments: Report of Disbursements APPROVED.~,.(~~. ] ./~,~'k · --- - ' - ~_,it~M anager Candace Horsley, AGENDA. WPD/krs APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance -r Li.I Z qD kid L.d n iii , n DJ J rn 0 U_LO t--o ~-~o L.) · o ~ 0000 O0 Z 0000 O0 ~ 0000 O0 J 0000 O0 ~ 0000 O0 0 ~ ~ O0 O0 0 ~~ ~ O0 0 000000 O0 O0 0 000000 O0 O0 0 000000 O0 O0 0 000000 O0 ~ zzzzzz ~ oo o oooooo oo oD Oh 0,404 ,-..H ~ 04040,4 o o ooo o o o o ooo 0 o ooo ~ r--. r.-, r--. r'-.. 0404 O0 O0 O0 O0 r~r-- EL. EL 0 0 000 O0 0000 O0 0000 O0 ~ 0000 O0 0 000~ ~ ~ .... · . ~ 00~ ~ ~0~ O0 Z 0~00 ~ 0~0 O~ Z~Z 000000 O0 000000 O0 000000 O0 ~o~o~ ¼~ O~ ~ 0~0~00 O~ 6~ 6 ~oo~oo o~ oo o ~o~o~ ~ ........ 66 o ooooo~ o~ ~ ~ ooooo~ ~¢ .~ ~ ~z ~z z ~ ~ z~ O~ ~ ~ ~ z~z z z ~ z z~ ~ ~ ~oo oo ooo oo ooo oo 666 66 , . ~o oo ~ o~ oo~ ~ SS4 SS 00~ O0 ~ Z~ ~ ~ Z~ ZZ ~J ~ ~ ~ ~~J~ ~J ~ ~ ~J ~ ~~j j ~ j ~ Z~~J ~ Z ~ ~J ~ ~j ~ ~z J ~ ~J ~ ~ ~ %~J ~ ~~0 ~0 Z~O ~ ~~0 ~0 ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~~Z ZZZ ~Z ~ ~~Z ~Z ~ Z ~Z ~Z ~0 Z ~ ~ ~ 0 ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ Z~WWO ZZ ~ Z 0 000 ~ ~ 0 000 ~0 O~ 0~--~ O4 6O0O 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 O0 r~ i'~r~ oD oo co 0 ooooo0 0 ooo000 o 000ooo 0 000000 IIIIII 0 0000o0 ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~ ~ ~~0~ 0 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 0 000000 000000 z 0 ~ 000 o00 Z 0 0 0 O0 0 oo 0 O0 o ~ 0000~0 0 000000 0 000000 0 000000 ....... 0 ~00~0~ 0 00~00~ 0 0~0~ ~ZZ~Z Z Z<<¢< ~ZZ~Z Z~ZZ~Z 00000 00000 00000 ..... ..... ~~0 ~0~ ..... 00000 0000~ 0 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 0 000000 ~ ~ o00000 · 0 ~ 0~~ ...... 0 ~ 0~00~ 0 ~ ~00~ ZZZZZ 0 ZZZZZZ ~ :) Cr Z (-..,) ,,,~ E~ i Z 000000 000000 000000 000000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00000 ~¢~ ~0~ 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 O0 000 O0 000 O0 000 O0 000 0 ~ 0 000 000 000 O0 000 0 q- L.~_ 0 000000 000000 0 000000 Z 000000 000000 ~ZZZZZ ZZZZZZ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 . 0 ~ 0 ~ ~~ ..... d ~ o o ooooo 0 ~ 0 ~ ~~ 000 000 ~ 000 000 0 000 000 0 ~ ~ ~ 000 · · 00~ 000 ~ ~ 0~0 000 O0 ~ H ~m~U Z W Z J 00000 ~ jj UH 000 Z JJJJJJ~ ( [ U ( HHHHH~ ~~ J((~ ~ ~ H~H ~ ~~0 ~ ~ ~ ZZZZZO ~0 ~0 ~0 ZZZ ~ ~~~ Z 0 J ~ ZZZZZ~ 000~ ~~ ~ ZZZ ~ 0000000 ~ ~ 0 0 ~~ ~0~0 0~0 ~ ~ Z 0000000 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~0 ¢~0~ ~0~ ~ ................. 0 ~000~ 0 ~ ~ Z 0000 0 O0 ~ 0000 0 O0 ~ 0000 0 O0 ~ 0000 0 O0 0 O0 0 O0 0 O0 0 O0 000000000000~~ 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000~~ ~~~~000000 000000000000000000 O0 O0 ~ ~~ 000000000000000000 ~ ~~ 000000000000000000 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 000000000000000000 ~ ~ 0000 0 O0 0 O0 000000000000000000 O0 mn,' 0 4-L~_ 0 U 0 0 0 O0 00~00000~0000~0000 O0 0 0 0 O0 000000000000000000 O0 O0 ~ 0 0 0 O0 000000000000000000 0 · .... o ~. ~ ~ ~~o~~o~4¼4o~ ~ ~~ 0 O~ 0 O0 0000~00000~00000~0 ~ ~~ ~ O0 ~ O0 00~00~00~00~0~0~00 ·. Z 0000 0 O0 0 ~ ~~ 0 O0 0 O0 0000~0000~000~0 % X X Z~ ~Z~ ~Z ~~ ~ Z ZW ~0 000~0 000~ 0000 ~ ZZZZO ~ ~0 ~ ~00 ~~~~~~WO ~0 ~ ~>~z ~ ~Jz ~ ~z ~~~~~~z J~Z ~ zzzz~ ~ ~ ~ ~z~ ~0~~0~~0~~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ ~~ 0 ~0 0 000 0~~~~~~ ...................... · · · ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~000000 ~ OO ~ ~0o ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~Z o~o~000000000000 Z~ coco (.~ 1'",- L~ U") 0 Ld !..d CO O,,J (~1 ~, z z ~ oo z O O ~ oo ~-~ Z Z f"- 0'~0~ (.~ O O O OO r.--I ~.-.I t~l O OO O OO O OO OD OO O OO r---I O OOO O OOO 0 000 1'~ O OO O OOO r--.I ~ r-.-I ~.-4 O O OO O O OO O O OO I'~ r--. I'~ f'~ LI_ ID_ O O OO O O O O O O EL LI_ O O nnn/ 0 0 O OOO O O OO O OOO O O OO O OOO O O OO · . · . . o ooo ~ ¼ oo ~ ~ o ~ o o ~ ~ oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~S~ o ~ GG O · ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o oo ~ ~ o ~o~ ~ ~ oo . . ~ OO O O~O ~ O OO O O O O O O I'~ Oq un o ,-4 0o . ~-H O O OO O ~ O O O O r--I ~ < -3 ~C)~ Lui 0 l--l-- Z :%):%) f,_) O0 0000 0000 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OCD 0 ~ 0 0 <~ Z ¢n 0 LID i , I-- n,' r¢ 0 Z O0 ~ C~ 0 ,~ O4 Oh 0') 'q" O0 0'~ 0 0 0 r'-. 0 0 COCO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 00000 00000 00000 ~0~ 00000 00000 00000 OO O0 O0 0 0 ~~o ~ 0000~ O0 00000 O0 nnod 0 u,-- L.~ 0 0 0000 0 0000 Z .... 0 O~ ~~ ~ ~ ..... ~0 0000 ~ .... z S4 oooo ~ ~ o0oo i,I t.d I--- ..J Z LLJ 0 ~~ 0 00000 ¢~ ~0~ O0 ZZZZZ ~ ZZZZZ ~ L.~_ r,_O I--O C.~ · CD & Z ~ 000 ._1 ~ C) O0 0 ~-,.i r~l ~.~1 ooo cO e0 co ooo I'-.. r--. I"-.. 0000 0000 0000 ~ 000 000 0000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 mn,' 0 4-.I, 0 ooo ooo I.- ooo z : ddd 0 . . . 000 ~ · . , Z 000 ES) 000 0 0 ~ 0000000000~00000000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 0 0 0 0000000000000000000 d d d ooooooooooooooooooo ~ ~~ .... ~ ~ 0 ~00~0~~0~00~0 ~ 0~0~ 0 0 ~ 00~~0000~0~000~ 000 0000 ~ ~ ~ 0~~00~0~0~00~ 000 0000 0 d ~ oooo~ooooo~o~oooo ~ ~~ o o ~ oooo~ooo~o~o~oooo ~ zzzz ~zz ~~z ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~z .................... o ~zzz ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ooo ~o z ~ o~ ~ ~ wz ~ ~00000 000000000~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ JZZZZ ~ ~ ~ J ~ Z~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0000000000000000 p~ ¢ & ~ ~¢¢~ ~ O~ ¢~ ~JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ~ 0,,~ F-o ~o (.~ · o Z ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 000 000000 0 0 O0 00000 000 0 0 0 ~ 000 000000 0 0 O0 00000 000 0 0 0 ~ 000 000000 0 0 O0 00000 000 0 0 0 0 0 O0 000 iiiii 0 ~ o~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ooo ~ ~ D ~ 000 000000 0 0 O0 00000 000 0 0 0 rna/ 0 ~-~_ 0 ooo oooooo o oo ~ 000 000000 0 O0 0 ~ 000000 ~ ~ ~ ~ · , ~ ~ ~oo~ ~ oo 00o ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ o oo , . ~ ...... z S~S ooo~oo o o oo ~ ~ oo0~0 0 ~ oo zzz i.,-i i--I I--I 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 ~ o ~ o ooooo ooo ~ ~ ~ ooooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ~~ ooo ~ ~ ~ · . . ..... 00000 000 ~ 0 0 ~ X ~ ~ 0000 0 0 0 ~ ~00~ 0~0~00~ ~ 0 ~ ~0~ Z ~0~ 0~000 ~ 0 ~0 0~00~ 0000 0 0 0 ~ ........... ~ ~ ~ ~~ oooo ~ ~ ~ x/ n/ 0 ',-) 0 z W [DC) Z JJ -I-Oh u_CO O< I--O ~-~o ~ · ~ LOLO LC 0 O0 Z 04 040,..I ~ 0 O0 _J 0 O0 n CO ~ CD O0 ~ i"-,,, I",,,, n ~ ID_ EL. EL .J r--I ~r~l 0 O0 0 00~~~~~ 0 0000000000000000 0 0000000000000000 0 0000000000000000 iiii 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0 0000000000000000 ~ ~ ~ ~ o~¢ o o o o oooo o o o o oooo o o o o oooo nnn" 0 %.-. L~ 0 o oooo~ooooooooooo o oooooooooooooooo o oooooooooooooooo o 666666666666~666 ~~~oooo~o~ o ooo~oo~~~o o ooooooooo~ooo~ w ~ x ~ ~0 ~~~~~~0 0 ~ ~zzO 000 0 ~~~~0~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ 000 0 ~0~~~~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ 6oo o ~ ~ ~ ooo ~ ~~~ ~o~~ o ~ ~ ~ ooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z~ J~ ~ ~ ~0000000000000000 ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~~ O~ ~ O0 0 000 U · 0 0 0 U O0 0 000 O0 C~ 0 ~-H ('~ 0') ~ 04 O,J ~ 0,104 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 ¢"') ('0 O0 O0 ('OEO 0 0 0 0 O0 000000 0 O0 000000 0 O0 000000 0 O0 000000 0 O0 nnn,' CE) ~,.- Ii_ 0 U ~ O0 000 Z 0 O0 ~ ~ O~ 000 ~ ~0 0 0~0 , . . ~ · . Z O0 0 000 ~ O0 ~ 000 z ~0 U ~z~O ~~ ~ oo ~~ ~ oo 66666~ o 66 ~ooo~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ZZZ Z Z ~ JJ I.--o ~-..~ o (_) . o ooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooo illllllllllllllll 00000000000000000 o ~ ~ ~o~~ o o o oooooooo ~ ~ 0 ~o~~o o o o oooooooo oD 00 0 o o o 00 cO o o l'-.. 1'~ o o can,' 0 q-Lb. 0 0~00000000~00000 00000000000~00000 00000000000~00000 0~00~000000~000 0 ~00~0~~0~00~ ~~000~00~0~~ 0000~0~0~000~ ~ ................. Z 00000~0~000000 ~ 0000~~¢¢~~~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ZZ~ 0 0 0 0000~000 ~ 0 0 00000000 0 0 0 00000000 · ~ ~ o ~oo~oo o o ~ oo~oo~ ~ o ~ oo~oo~ . o o o o o o ooo~oo~o z ~ o o o o o o o o 04 o ~ o j~ .~ ~ ~ z j.. 2JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ ~ ~ U ~J~~ ~ ~ ~ JO0000000000000000 ~ ~z ~ ~w~~z ~ O~ <o z ooo~oooo¢~ooooooo >< oo ¢ ~u~uu~< >~ ~o ~ x ~ 0~~~ z~ ~ o ~o ~ ~ r'nr~ 0 q-.- L~ 0 -F'ii OU n/ I~0 ~0 0 · 0 i O0 0 <~o u_ u._ z 0.~ I--o 0 · LLJ 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 O0 ~ 0 0 0 O0 .J 0 0 0 O0 .J ~1 ,r-.I ~ ~-t~1 L) 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 C:) O0 oo oo oo %-~.- ~--~ O0 oo oo o o o o o o o o o r'... o o ~ ~ o 0 04 o LL O0 0 ~.~ 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 u,-.L~_ 0 r... o o coco oo o o o c;Do oo o o o oo oo ~ 6 o 66 66 o ~4 u~ 66 66 o 6 6 66 66 CZ) 0 0 O0 O0 J z ILl ~ LLI LLI u n I ~ Z Z L~W~ r¢ W ~-~ z z J I ~ ~ ~ W~ .00 ~Z ~ J~ ~ ~0 ~OOX ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~z ~ ~ ~ 0 oo ~ w~ ~% ~ ~ Z~ ~ 0 ~W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~U ~ ~XX~ ~ ~ Z~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ J 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 ~ o Z ~ ~ o Z ~ ~ ~ 00~00 0 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ O0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 o o oooooo ~ o o o 0 o o o o o oo0oo0 O0 ZZZZZZZ ooooooo ooooooo 0 o 0 o 0 0 o 0 o0oooo O~ 0oooooo o o 0 o o 0 o 0 oooooo oo 00ooooo Z o oooooo oo o0ooooo 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ooo0oo ~ oooo0oo · . 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ o~o~o~ ~ ~o~o~0~ o ~0~o~o ~0 0~0~0~ ~ ~ ~ 0 o 0 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~0~o~o ~ 0~o~~ ...... . ...... ~ z ~ o o o o o ~ o ~ ~o~o~o ~4 ooo~o~o ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~0~0~0 O~ 000~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ Z~ZZ~Z ~ ~ ~ < ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ZZZZZZ ~ ~Z~Z~ ~ Z ~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0 <~0 u~~0 ~ ~ z z ~ zzzzzz~ ~ > z z ~ ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ o o o ~~o~ ooo ~oo~~ Z ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o ~oooo~ ooo ~oo~oo .................. o ~ ¼ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oo~ ooo ~~~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <~ z ~z ~ z <~ ~ Z~ OZ Z~ ~ ~ ~ 0 O0 O~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ZZ Z ~ ~0 ~ Z~ O~ ~ ~ ~Z ~ ~ Z H 0000000000000000000000000000 J UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU U 0000000000000000000000000000 0 0 000 O0 0 0 000 0 0 000 O0 0 0 000 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000 =z 66~66666~666~W6¼¼66666~666 0 U z 66666666666666~~66666666 ~ 00000000000000~~000~~ Z~ ~ Z~ ~ ZZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~Z~ZZ ~ ~Z 000 O0 000 O0 000 O0 666 66 · · ~ 000 Z ~~ ~0 · · ~ Z ~ ~UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU ~ ~ ~ 0000000000000000000000000000 Z~ z~ ~~ O~ <~ z ~oooooooooo~ooooo~oooo~oooooo ~ ~ ~< ~= z ooooo 0 IIIii 00000 U OOOOO 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 6'4 O O O O ":::1' rO O Z Z 04 ~ Oh ,-) Oh 0 0 oO DJ O O O O O O O 0 ~-. LL. 0 OOOOO O O O O O OO O O O O ~ O O OOOOO O O O O O OO O O O O O O O ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OO ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ U ..... ...... .. OOOO~ ~ O O O o Oo ~ ~ O O ~ o ~ ~o~ O ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ o z ~ooo~ ~ S o o o SK S o o o ~ o o ~ ~O~ ~ O O O O O~ O ~ O ~ ~ O O X X << X Z ~ ~ U U U U ~ ~ Z ~ Z ~ ~ ~ Z Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ zz ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z O Z O ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ x O z ~ ZZZZZ~ ~ ~ zz~ ~ ~ ~ OOOOO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0 ~ ~ O ~ O ~0 ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O I ~ ~~ ~ x ~ O~ z~ " ~~ ~ U U 0 J~ Z~ 0 U ~ ~~ ~ ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z~ ~ Z~ ~ ~ Z < ~ zzzzz O~ O~ ~ ~ Z< ~ ~ Z~ ~U ~ ~ ~ z~ zk ~U JJJJJ ~ ~ (~ k~ Z~ 'FF ~W ZO ~F 05 k~ O~ O0 ~ ~~ Z~ ~ ~Z ~0 ~Z .~ ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ ~ ZZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ Z Z Z ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 000000 oo~co oc~o~ c)oc~ CDC)C) CD oq ,--~ co oO IJJ C~C~O OhC~Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~~~ o o ooo o ooo 0 0 000 0 000 0 0 000 0 000 O06OO0 ooo C~ C~ C~ 0 ~ UUUUUUUU ~ ~ UUUUUUUU 0 000 00000000 0 q-Lb 0 U 0 000000 0 000000 H 0 000000 0 o ~~ < o ~ 000000 ~ ~ oo~~ ~ ...... z ~ oooooo ~ ~ oooo~o oo o ~ o ~oo oo~ooooo oo o ooo o ooo oo~ooooo oo o ooo o ooo oooooooo dd d ddd d -4d oooooooo oo · ~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~~oo~ ~o ~ ~ ooo ~ ~ ~o~o~~ · · . , . . . ....... ooo ~ ~ ooo o o~o ooooooo~ ~0 ~ 0 00o 0 o~o o0o00o~ W ZZZZZZJ ~Hj I N UUUJ & O(~J ~J~~j Z ~ 000000~ ~~ ~ Z ~ 0 ~0 w ~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~~~0 ~ ~ ~wW~O ~0 ~ 0000 ~ '~0 ~U~~O H UZ ~ ~ JZ ~ % 0 U ~%J O~ ~Z 0 ~ U 0 ~ 0 ~~Z~ ~UH ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 -z ~ ~ ~zzz ~ ~ ~ 0 J~ ~ZZZZZ~ UZ~ ~ JO ~~ ~ ~JJJ 0~~~ O0 ~ ~ ~ZZZZZ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~0 ~H~ U% Z~ ~ ~~U >UU~ ~ ~U Z~ ~ Z~ ZOO000000 ~ oooo o o oooooooooo o o oooooooooo o o oo o o ~ 7 ~ ~ 0 ~ ,f.-.) z 60~ o o oooooo o o oooooo ~ ~ oooooo o o oooooo oooo ~ oooo 0 0~00 ~000 ~ .... Z 000~ ~ 0000 Z 0 0 0000000000 0 0 0000000000 0 0 ~ ~ 000000~00 0 ~ ~0000~~ .......... 0 0 00~~0000 0 0 00~~0000 ZZ~~ ZZ ZZ~~ ZZ ~ ~ZZZZ~~ 0 O0 0 O0 0 O0 ~ . . ~ ~ c,c, ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~~ 0 0 000000 ~ ~ 000000 d d dddddd zz IIIiii zz~z~ w ~ zzzz ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~0 ~ U ~W~JJW~ ~ 000000 ~ ~~o ~ ~ ~~~~o ~ ~ ~o ~ ~ zzzzzz Z ~~ ~ o ~o~0o~o~o ~ 0 ........... , . . . ..... o o~o~ ~ ~ ~o~o~o~o~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oo~ ~ 0000000000000000000000000 ~ 000000000 O0 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 00~0000000 O0 0 0 0~00000000 O0 0 0 0000000000 O0 ~ ~ oooo~oooo oooo~o~oo~~~~oooo~ 6666¼6¼666666666666666666 ~~00~0~000~0~ 0~0~0000~00000~0~ 0~0~0000~00000~0~ 666666666666666666 00000~00~0~0~00 ~~00~0~000~0~ .................. 000000000000000000 Z Z ~ ~ ~~ZZ ~ ~ UU ~U UUU~U~ ~ O000JOJOOJJJJ~JJJJ~OOOJ~ = = ~<<o<<=~<< ~ ZZZZ~Z~ZZ~~~~ZZZZ~O ~~~ ~ U ZZZZ~Z~ZZ~~OO~~ZZZZ~ ~~00~0~000~0~ UU U U U U U U U U U 0 ~ ~ ~: ~ 00~0~0~0~0~0~0 0~0~0 oo o~ ~ ...... o~<~<~<~<~<~,~<.<~ ~oo~2ooooo~22oooooo O ,-4,-4 .-J ,-4 ,.-.I ,--I (-) O OO ,-t ,--I ,--I ,--I O O OO O O OO O O O O O O Oq O,.I J _J O O U') ~ LOLO W W 0000 i:::z::tv' ""d" ",~" o (:D (:DO ~~O~~ ~~OOOOOOO 00000000000 00000000000 00000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 6000000000000 000000000~0 oo~o~o~o~ ........... ~oo~~ooo~ o~0000~~ ~oo~~ ........... OOOOOOO~OO OOOOO~~ Z ~ Z ~ Z ~ Z '~ W ~ W Z ~ ~ ~ <~ ~ ~ OOO~ooooooooooo OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~O~o~o~oo~~ OO~OO~Oo~o~ooo~ ~000000~00000000 ~00~0~0000~ OOOOOOOOOOOO~~ 0000000000000~ ~ ZZ ~ ~Z ~Z Z~ Z~ ~ Z~O~ ~ ZO~Z~ ,_J oo 3 :: &~&~~~ Ojjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj O ~ ~ ~O ~O O~W ~zzzzzzzzzzz O~~~~~~ w~ O~ ~ ~ z~ j~ ~00000000000 ~ z~ z~ ~ 0~ 0~ LL r,,.O 0"~ I--0 "--~0 Q.) . 0 I o oooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo o ooooooooo o ooooooooo oo o CD CD CD 0000 0000 0 000000000 0 00000000000000 0000 ~~ 0 O0 O0 ~ 00000000000000 0000 0000 0 O0 O0 Z 0 ~ oo~o~oo~oo oooo oooo ~ ~ oo 0 ~0o~oo0~oo~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ .............. ~ ~ooo~00~0~~ ~0o ~~ ~ 0'.0o..0O. o0..~.. 00~o~~0~ o0~ 0o00 ~ ~~00~ ........ . ........ z ~~om~oooooo oo~ oooo ~ ~~oooo ~ ~~~ooo~ ~~ oooo o ~~~ ~ zz~ zz ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z zz zz z~ zz~ zz ~ ~ ~~ ~ zz z ~~ 0 z~zz zz ~ ~ ~WW ~~~ ~~ 0000~ Z ~~ ~ Z 0~~~~0~0 ~~0 ~~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0 Z 0 Z Z 0 ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~%~W%%~W%%~Z ~W~Z ~WZ ~ ~WW~WW~Z Z ~ ~~~~~ ~0~ ~0~ 0 00~000~00~ 0 Z ~~~~~0 ~~ ~~ 0 00~00~00~ ............... 0 0 ~~~~~ o~0 ~o~ o 0~0o~oo0 "I-CD ~,D P--O0 ._1 0 O0 0 ~~0~ ~ ~ 00000000 O0 000 00000000 O0 000 ~ 0 O0 00000000 O0 000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ o ~~ 0 0 r~- ~ oo ~~~ o oo~ o oo oooooooo o ooo ~ o oo oooooooo o ooo z = ~ ¼¼ oooooooo ~ . ......... · o oo ~~~ o~ ~o .......... , · . z S ¢~ oooooooo oo ooo ~ 0 ~ 00000000 O0 000 ~ ZZ % ~ 0 ~ 0 00000 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 00000 0 ~ ~ ~ 0000~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oo~ ~ ~ ~ zz~ z ~ 0 ~~~0 Dxo ~<0 ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~ ~000000~ ~<~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ Z ~ ~0 ~0~~0 ~0 ................ . .... ~'~ 0401..0 0 ~ 000060 Z / .(.D 000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO O0 I"-, ._1 / q2 "~ O4O4 0 0 ~;' LO W W 0 O0 O0 Oh O0 CO 04 04 040404 0 0 000 0 0 000 04 040,.104 0 00000 00000 00000 0 0 000 0 00~0 ~ · < ,--,~,=; z n,' z ~. ~-~ w w~ r~z 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 . . ~ ~ 0 0 O0 ~ 0'1 0 0 O0 . . ,:5 ,5 o o ,=,o 0 0 0 0 O0 n n UU / j :Z~ :Z::I Z Z I'-'- 0 0 (/'} Z ~1:1 ~;:,d 000 00000 000 00000 000 00000 0 0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~00~ ~ ~ ~ ~00~ ........ S S ooo ~ooo ~ ~ ooo ~oo~ f z ~ 0 j ~ ~ J ~ J Z ~~ : ~ Z~ ~ ~jjjjj ~ 0 ~ z ~ ~ O~ ~ ~~ Z 0~ ~ ~ ~ O~ J ~ ~w~ ~ 0 ~~ ~0 ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~J~J ~ZZZZZ ~ W~ ~ O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .w ~00000 ~ ~ ~~ Z~ J~ ~ ~W ~ ~ ~OJO ~~ 1.1.1 0 0 z 0 LC) 0 0 0 0 I z I--'4 0 "'r" W OL~ >- k-o ~o ~ · 0 i oo ol..~ Z 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 Z 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000 ~~~~~0~0~00~0~000~~ 00000000~0000~0~~0~000~0~00 Z 0000000000000000000000~0~~000 00000000000000000000~~~0~ 0 000 0 CD LC) O~ 0"~ 0"~ · . . 0 0 04 OC;DO ZZ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ~ ~ ~ ~ 00000000000000000000000000000000 Z ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ Z ~00000000000000000000000000000000 -J oo 0 Li,J U 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 O~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 000 ~ ~ ~ U O0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 0 0 ~-L~ 0 O0 0 0000 0 0 ~ ~ 000 000 0 0 O0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 ~ O0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 000 000 0 0 Z 0 ~ ~ ooo0 ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ o · . < ~ ~ ~o~o ~ ~ o ~ 6~6 ~o ~ O0 0 0~0~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~ 0 ~ 0 ~ .... · ..... z ~ ~ ~o~ o o o ~ ~oo o~ o ~ o ~ ~ o ~~ o o o ~ ~o0 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ZZ ~ ~ ~ x <<~ x x < ~ ~zz ~ ~ ~ z ~ Z ~ z Z ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ zz~ ~ ~ ~ Z~ ~ J z <<~<j z z z ~ <~Hj ~<<j z , ~ JJ( 0 ~[~( 0 0 N [~( ~ZZ( 0 ~ z ~0 ~~0 ~ z ~0 ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~UUO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~H~O ~0 ~ ~ ~ U zzz ~ ~~z ~ ~ < z ~z z~z ~ u Z u ~ ooo o ~~ ~ o ~ o ~~ ~~ o ~ o Z 000 ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~~ ~0~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ..... ........ o ~ 4 ~oo o 6 ~ 6 ~~ ~~ ~ G 6 LO -J (DO ~ O4O4 ELI, COCO 0000 COCO COCO OhOh (DOC;) OOO OOO (DO OOO OOO OOO i i i i i i i i (:D O CD CD O C;) (D O O (;D (DO COCO (:DO O0 eO o 0 t,O X LO E:l O0 Z ~- rm ,~ Z u') ,~ I-- eq L..) Z Ir' O I-- Z ,~ I'-- ~ kO r--. r'-.- o o o o o o o o o o oo 0 oo ~o~ < 66 ~o. ~ · · z mm 6~6 666 ~ ~ 0~0 000 ~ ZZ ~Z~ ~ 0 0 0 0 LO LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 CD ~ 0 0 0 0 O,J 0'~ 0", . 0 P',- 0 0 0 0 0 X X X X ~ ILl ILl ILl Ld ~--~ Z Z Z Z I_k.J Z Z .~ ,-..4 Z Z zr~ >- 0 ~.--~ W"~ 0 re.'.U ',< LJJ~ I-- J . x ~ ~,n O<~z ~zl.--F.- t--o ~ ,-~o IL.. o ,...--i ,.-.i ~ CD coco n,' ~ cdc) z r'-.. r'.-,, o ooooo o ooooo o ooooo i~. co 0~ o ,-.4 0,,j 0o 'd" LO kid CO CO CO Ch Oh 0'~ Ch Ch Ch Ch 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t--.I 0 0 0 oo~o ~ 0000 0 ~ 0 ~~ ~ O0 0 ~~ ~ ~ ~ 00~00 z ~ ~ ooooo ~ oo ~ oo~oo z o >>o u ~ ~o ~ z ~ ~ <<~<~ ~ ~ o zzo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ J ~ ~ Z ~ Z ~Z ~ ~~ZZ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0~ ~ 000000 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ 000000 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 · . ..... 00000~ 0000000 0 O0 0 O0 0 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 0 ~--L~_ 0 U ~0 0 ~0 ~0 0 O0 ~ ~0 0 O0 Z · , ~ oo ~ ~ ~ 00000~ ~ ~ Z 0000000 0 ~0 ~ 0000000 0 ~0 0000~0~000~~ 000000000000~0 00000000000000 0~0~~000000 ~0~000~~~ 0000000000000~ 0000~~~~ 00000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000000 0000000o000000 00000000000000 000000000o0000 00000000~0000~ 0~~~0~0~ 00000000000000 00000000000000 ~ ~J Z ~J ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~J J ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~Z ~ ~0 ~ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ 00000~ U~ ~~~~Z ~ 00000000000000 ~ ZZZZZ~O ~ 0~0 ~~ . ~0~~0 ~~~~~ ~ ZZZZZO~ ~ ~ ~00~~0~%~~ ~~~~~ Z 0 ~ ~ZZZ ~ ~Z W~ ,ZZ~ O~ Z~ J'' O~JJJ LO ~( ~ Z ~ J% ~ ~XXXXXXXXXXXXXX ~ ~00000000000000 ~W~UW~UU~~ ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ O~ ~ , , ~ , , ~ ~Z W~ ~~~~~ ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ O~ ~ ~O0000Z~ ~Z ~W~ ~~WW~W~~ 00000000000000 Uk Z~ ~~(] (( ~ (~~&~&~&~ ~jjjjjjjjjjjjjj 0000000000000000000 ~ 0000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0 0 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 ~000~0~0~000~~ 0~0~00o~0~0~000 o~o~o~o~~~ ~ ................... z oooo~0~o~o~~0oo0 ~ oo0oo~o~~~0~ o oooo0 0 ooooo o o~~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ..... o ~ o 6 0 0000000 0 0000000 0 0000000 ~00~0~ 0 0~0~0 ....... 0 0000000 0 000~00~ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Z ~ ~ ~ ~ 0000000000000000000 ~ 0 ~~ Z ~~~ ~ Z ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ ~ ~ ~U~UU ~ ~ Z~ W~~~~~~~ Z~ Z~ Z~ Z~~ Z~ Z ~ O~ ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ 0 O~ 0~~ O~ 0~~~ O~ ~ 0000000000000000000 ~ ~¢ ~ ~00000 ~ (%) LLI I~. Z ~-4 C::) .J 0 0 0 0 F- Z ~) ~-I ~-I 0 0 O0 0 0 O0 O0 O'~Ch O0 I I i,i L.~ O0 :7 ~ ~.~ ,~-I 0 0 Z C~ O0 t-,.,I ~ 0 0 O0 0 0 0000 0 0 0000 0 0 0000 0 000000000000000000 0 000000000000000000 0 000000000000000000 0 000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 O0 ~ 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0000 .... m o ~ ~ o oooo ~ 0 O0 ~ 0 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 000000000000000000 0o0o0ooo~0oo0~0~ o o0ooo0o0o0oo0ooooo o0o0o0o0o0oo0o00o0 ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ZZ~ ~ zZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ J 0 ~ 0 ~0~ ~ 000000000000000000 g ~Z J ~ &~Z ~ ¢ Z~FOZ ~ JJJJJJJjjjjjjjjjjj I J" ~ ~ O~Z ~ Z~~ Z~ ~ Z~ Z¢ EF~ ~ ~ ~jjjj ~ ~ 0 O~ O~ J J~ ~ ~z z~~ z~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~z ~ ~ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ~ ~ O~ 0 ~% ~ ~ ~ ~¢~ ~ ~000000000000000000 ~o ~ ~ ~ z z z 0 0 0 ~ H J 0 u cO o o o o 0 0 % U 000000000000000000 0 O0 ~ O0 000000000000000000 0 O0 0 ~ 000000000000000000 0 O0 O0 Z 0 . . = oooooooooooooooooo ~ ~ 6 66 , ~oo~ooo~o~o~oo~ o ~o o o~o~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~o~o~o~~~ o ~o ~ oooo ~ oo z o ~o ~ oooo 6S ~ ~ 000~0~~~0~ 0 ~0 0 ~~ ~ O0 .H , .~. ~ ~ ~Z.Z < Z< '~ ~ ZZ Z ~~U~~~~~O ~ ~<0 ~ U~U~O U~O 0 ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ~ Z ~ ~ ~Z~Z~ ~ ~ ~ 000000000000000000 ~ ~ ~ ~0~0 ~ ~ ~~~~~~0 0 ~00 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~0 000 U JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJZ ~ :~Z ) ~F~FZ UUZ H~Z U WW~WWWWWWW~W~W~W Z OZW ~ ~~ UU~ ~ U f ~ ~ Z~ ~ ~~ ZZ ZZ .. ~ Z ~ 0000 ~ ~ Z 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~J ~ J ~ 0~~ 0~ < ~ J~~~~~~ U~ ~ uu JZZZZ z~ x~ ~ Z~ ~zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ~ ~xz O~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~000000000000000000 ~Z ~ Zj ZZZZ~ Z~ 3~ O~ ~JJJJJJJjjjjjjjjjjj (~ ~ ~ ~F~F~ 0~ OXX ~ 0 0 0 0 000 -J CD 0 0 0 000 o .,~ LO ',,.D C.~ 0 CD 0 0 000 (N.I ("q ('NJ 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 000 Od Od 0,,I 04040,4 r'~ r'~ ~ r-., P-,. 1,-,. 12_ 0_ n ~ kid b.J '-r- 'i- '-r- ,-4 04 t/') I.-- I.-- I- r--. o,..I rY ZZZ :~ LO SD 000 CD 0 0 000 0 O0 0 O0 0 no_ 0 XX 0 O0 i i i 0"100 000 0,..I 0 0 W Z 0 0 0 0 f,-) LO ~-4 0 0 000 <::I: 0 ,.~ z ~ o ,5 ,5 ,::;,::dc; x L~ W L~WL~ o oo o o oo o oo o oo o o o ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~o ~ ~ ~ o ~. o ~ oo~ ~ , , . zzz o o o "f-O 0000000000000 0000000000000 0 000 0 0000 0 O0 0 0 000 0 0000 0 oO 0 0 ~ ~ 0000 0 O0 0 ~ 0 000 0 0000 0 O0 0 0 rnr'Y 0 q--La 0 0000000000000 0 O~ 0000 0 O0 0 0 0000000000000 0 O0 0000 0 O0 0 0 ~ 0000000000000 0 O0 Z 0000 0 O0 0 0 = ooooooooooooo 6 ~6 oooo 4 66 6 ~ ~ ~0~~~0~0~ ~ ~ · · . ~0000000~0~0 0 00~ ~ ~~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ 000~ 0 O~ 0 0 ~ ~0~0~~0 0 ~0 ~ 0~0~ 0 ~ ~ z oooooo~oooo~o 6 666 6 oooo o 66 6 o ~ 000~00~00~0 0 000 ~ 0000 0 O0 0 0 ~ X X ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z ~ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ Z ~ 0000000000000 ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ ~0~~00~~0 0 ~0~ ~ ~~0 0 000 0 ~ ~ ~~ 0 000 0 ~ .............. , . . . , .... 0<~ I--o ~.-~ c) (._) , CD I 00000 O0 OO02 0 O0 0 oo o4o4 6ooo oo ~o~ o oooo o oooo oooo o oooo o oo o oo 0000 ~0 0 000 0 ~0 0 000 0 ~ ~0 0 000 0 Z . . ~ oo 6 666 ~ U .. .~.,. ~ ~ O0 0,0~ 0 .. ~ ~ ~0~0~ ~ O0 ~ ..... , , z SS oo~oo ~ oo ~ ~ oo~o~ ~ oo ~~ oo 0000 O0 0000 O0 oooo ¼~ ~ ~~ o o~ o ~~ o ~ o .... ~ , ~o~o SS .... , , ~ oooo S oo o oooo ~ ~ 0000 zzzz ZZZZ Z 0~0 ~ ~ ~ ~0 > 0~0~0 ~ ~0 ~~0 U ~z wzw~wz ~ zzz > ~~z U ~wz ~~z I r--- Z P~ z~ c~r.D :z:) q;:) 0 (,/') Li.I 0~-~ r-~Ld -1- LiJ < ( I--o ~-~o C..) · oo Ld ~ Z 0 CZ) 0 O,J ChO'~ ~ 0 O0 000') 12~ n 0 O0 0 Z 0,.I O0 0404 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 .L¢)O OOC~ U")O 0 0 0 ~-I 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I"-.,. r'~, ~ ~ i"',,, ~ ~., i"~... o Oki 0 o o I-,- Z I-- I-- "~ ,,~ Z Z n," I-- 0 0 O0 I-- (,/') 0 (,~ 0 O0 0 0 ~DqD 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I'~ I'",,.. i"',.,, I~. r,,,, n/ 0 Lb 0 ~ r-~ ,.--I 01 0 n,' 0 ~ 00 cD 'q" 0 u") q;:) 0 ',,4D 0 0 0 C) 0 C:) C) CD w I_d rca/ oo oo oo , zz o o ~ oo o o o oo o o o oo ,5 o o ,=;,=; ' 0 0 LO .kO ~-.~ ~-.-I 0 0 0 ~ · X Ld Ld O0 ZZ (.~ .q~ La O0 0 0 LO 0"1 L¢¢ 0 0 0 ~ 0 ('~ 0') 04 ',,.0 ('NJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 Ld Z Z X 0 0 Z I-'- I--' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ . ... 000 0 0 0 0 0 IJJ z oo ~ oo · .-J oo o 0 EL 0 0 ,-4 ~ CO ~ U") ~4) r--. 00 o o cz) o o oo oo o o o o o oo oo cz) o o o o oo oo O~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 ~ I~ ~ r~ ~ r~ r~ I~1~ o ~ w ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ OO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ U ~ 0 ~ ~ oo Oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ OO ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ZZ O0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ii ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ZZ O0 ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ U O0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 q--LL 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 O0 O0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 ~ o 6 ~ 6 ~ ~ 66 6 ¼ 6 66 ~' ' < '' ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~W ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ O0 O0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ · . z S~ o o o K ~ S~ SS o S o oo ~ O0 0 o 0 ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ 0 0 O0 O0 U Z Z ~ X Z ~ ~J ~ ~ 0 U ~ J ~J ~ z ~j j Z ~xo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~0 ~ ~ ~0 0 ~ Z~O ~ ~ 0 ~ ~0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ >~Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Z ~Z ~ ~ ~ ~Z ~Z ~ Z~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ · '~ 00~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~ ~ ~o ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ 0 ~ ~o~ Z ~0 ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ... ~ 0 ~ 0 o~ ~o~ · . . , . . · 0 · I Lid 09 CO CO CO 0 eO Z ~-~ ZZ Ld 04 LdLd I_d 0 f'") :%) z 0 w O I-- 0 ~ z n- z L/') z f~ o o o o o 0oo 0 0 00000 0 0 00000 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I~. I'.. p... p.. 1".. CO CO CO CO CO P'. I'.. p... 1"',. P... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0 000 0 0 ~ 0 000 Z ~ 6 ~ o 6 ~66 0 u") u'~ 1.¢) o ~0 f.D, · , 04 · , · ,~. ~.4 ~-4 o ,~ ooo o o C~ o u") I'~ · · · Z 0 0 0 0 0 000 ~ ~ 00000 0 0 00000 0 0 00000 ~ 6 666~ o ~ ~~o o ~ oooo~ oo z f,,,O Ld ~ Z ~ L~ <{ ~ M') O0 Ld t--- rCLdl,I ~- 04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 o q;;:) cxj o ~ '..D ,"-' ~ ~ c; o o o iz') co 0'1 '.,O LC) 0 U') ~ CC 04 0 04 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ U") 0 b_fO 0<~ o · I 0 (-) o oo Ch O ,.-4 C'xJ Og ,~ LO ~ kO I'.-. 00 Ch LO kO kO kO kD kD kO O kid kO kO kO O O O O O O O C) O O O O OO CD C) C) C) C:) C) C) C) C) O O O O O O O O O O O O OO 04 LO 00 O Z ,-...4 ~ ~ ~ W e0 04 oh i--... ,-~ o LO O p,... O Ch Ch ~ Z r'n ,--I OOLO ~' t~ 04 Z gO 04 Z .gO I.J._ ,,--, C~ OC,,J P... ::Z;) O O iD i'--. O ~ W Ld O0 Oh .O Oh Z (._) O Z (._) rY r'¢ CNI COCO t'-t t'--I I'--I ,~1 t--I ~ ~ t-.-I r-t ,--I ~-4 t--'l ,-..I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CZ) 0 O0 0 Ch C',J (._) , . LO CO O O O O O O ~.-.~ ~.--~ t-.I O O O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O OO ,::; o o ,:::; o ~ ~ c:; ,.o o', o ~ o', o o", m o ~ ,.o ,.o oo L~ t--I · C',,J · · r-4 t--I L,~ ~,4 t--I o o o o ,.4 ,.0 o ,.4 o ,.-, o o L~ O0 · . o ,=; o o ,5 cC 4 cC cC c:; o o oo 0 0 LO kO 0 LO ~ "ct' LO 0 0 0 ILl I'"',,, r'"-,. Z C) O ~ OO · -J OO ,r"h r',,, r--,, ~ 0')60 o zz i..~J I_~J O ~ ~ i.-.41.-4 z Li.J .L~J ~ LC) kD I~, I~. ~ O O O OO O O O OO O O O OO I",,,, p-,, l",, I'"',,, r",,, o0 0') 60 0060 ~ i"'.,, h,,,,, r",,, r",,, o o o oooooooooo o o o ~.-,4 o,,.i Oh Oh Oh ooo ooo ooo ooo Od(NJ(NJ OOOOOOOOOO O O ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ OOO O O O OO O OOOOOOOOOO OOO O OOOOO O OOOOO O OOOOO ill OOOOO ~ ZZZZZ O ~,.- L~_ O r-- U OO O O O OO O OOOOOOO OO OOO OO O O O OO O OOOOOOO OO OOO Z OOO 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 O0 ~ 0~~~0 000 ~ · . ....... 0 · · · · . < ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~~o .~ ooo OO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OOOOOO~OO ~ ............. z oo ~ 6 o 66 o oooooo~o ~ ~ OO ~ O O OO ~ ~ooooo~~ ~ ~ Z ZZ X Z ~ ~ ~ Q ~ O Z ZZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z ~ ~Z ~ ~ ~oo~ O O~o O ~ 20 ZZ J ~J ~ J~~~ ~N~ ~ ~ (~ OU :~ U~ (JdJjjjjjj Z~ 0,~ u · o z ~~o ooooooo 0 IIIIIii Z ZZZZZZZ O0 oo oo r-.. i'-,. coco i'-...., i'-., 0'101 oo o o~ o oooo o oooo zzzz oo o oooo °ooooooooooooooooooooooo °ooooooooooooooooooooooo 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 0~00000 00~0~ ~0~0~0 Z ~0~000 LI.J Z O0 O0 0 O0 0 ~ 0 0~0~ ~ 0 0000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 66666666666666666666666~ ~00~000~0~0000~~~ ~0~00~0~00~~00000 00000000000~0~~00~0000 o00000000~0~~000~~ DJ u~ ~uuUUuUu ~ ~ ~~ ~uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu 2~ O~ ~ UJJJJJJJjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj Z ~-4 L~ tS) U -~ ~-~ 0 0 ~ ~ r~ Z <E oo o404 oo WLd ZZ 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000 ~ O00OO000000000000OO000 ~ O00OO00000000OO000OO00 O 0 ~I-L~ 0 o o o zz Li.J l. JJ _,J ._I -"~ oo oo oo · , Ld U z...J 0,,~ ooooooooooo~oooooooooo o oooooooooooooooooooooo o 0000000000000000000000 0 0000000000000000000000 ~ ~00~0~~0~00~0~ ~ 00~~00000~0~000~0 ~ 0~~00~0~0~000~0 ~ oooo~oooooo~oo~o~oo~ ~ oooo~ooo~o~oo~ooooo ~ I zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz~zz~ ~ ~ ~ Z~ ~% UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU~UU~ Z ~0 >0 ~0 ~00 JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJO U ~Z UUUZ ZZZ ~ZZ ~WW~W~W~~~W~Wz ~ ~ 00~0 000 000 ~00~~~0~0~~~ 0 ~Z ~ 0000 .... ~ ~0~ ~~0~0~0~0~~~~ 0 o ~ Z ~ 0 0000000 0 W ~ 00000 00000 00000 ~-I ~,--4 ~-,.,I 000 000 0 O0 0 O0 0 I.-4 00000 000 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 0000000 00000 00~ 0 O0 ~ O0 0 0 ~ 0 00000o0 00000 000 Z 0 0 ~ 6 ooooo~o ooooo 666 6 66 6 66 o 6 ............ · ~ 00000~0 ~00~ 0~0 ....... . · z ~ ooo~ooo ~oo~ 666 o oo Z ~ ~ Z 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ZZZZZ Z ZZZ Z ~ Z ~ ~~~0 ~~0 ~0 ~ ~ ~~~Z ~~Z ~Z ~ ZZZ ~ ~Z ~ Z L.d04 CO · -J" Z i Z ,~ ,-..I Z -r% >- 0 I--C:) O_Oh ':~-' I.--- Z OZZZZ L~(_~ 0<~ ~--0 U · ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 O ~ 0 ( ~ ( ~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Z U 0 0 ~ 0 0 000000000000000 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000 0000000 0000000 60 O0 600000 0 0 000 0000000 0 0 0 r--' u ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ooo~o~oooo oooo o o o o o o oooooooooo oooo ~ o o o o o o oooooooooo oooo z = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oooooooooo oooo U .......... 0 .... 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0~00~~00~00 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0000000~0~00~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z ~ ~ U Z ~ Z Z Z J ~ Z ~ ~ o ~o~ o o ooo o o ooo o~o~ooo ~o~o~ 00~00~0 00~00~0 U U z z >-Ill>- Ill u~ l:~2 Cr a2 u') C~ u') z ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~~~~0 ~x~x~O ~ F ~ 0 ~ F ~ JJJJJUJ~JJ JJjj ~HUH~& ~ U > J 0 ( 0 ~ WWW>W(WD~WOWW~WZ ~JUJ~U~Z W ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~~~0~~~ ~0~~0 0 Z ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~0~~0~~~ ~~~0 ~ 0 o ~ S o m o S ........................ · o o o "fED H 0 0 0 0 00000 J 0 0 0 0 00000 Z 0 ~ ~ ~ 0~~ U 0 0 0 0 00000 000000 000000 000000 0 0000 O0 00000 0 0000 O0 00000 ooooo ~ ~ ~o > zzzu o~ uUUUu z O00U ~ uUUuu ~ zzz< ~ <<~<< o oooo oo ooooo nary 0 ~.- Li_ o 0 0 0 0 00000 000000 0 ~0~ O0 0 0 0 0 00000 000000 0 000~ O0 ~ 0 0 0 0 00000 000000 0 0000 Z O0 = 6 6 6 ~ ~~ oooooo 6 oooo 66 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 00000 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o~ o~o~o ~ ~oo~ ~6 o o ~ o oo~oo ~o~oo~ o o~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oo~oo ~o~oo~ ~ ~o ~ ~ ..... ...... . . . . z ~ o o o oooo~ ooooo~ o oooo ~ ~ ~ o o o ooooo ~o~oo~ o oooo o~ ~ ~ z ~z~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~0 x x ~ uu~U x x ~ ~ z z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ zz~z~ ~ zJ ~ ~ z z ~ uu~Uzj ~~j ~ ~ j ~j z ~ ~ ~~ZO ~~0 J O~ ~0 ~0 u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~%~ ~ 00000 00000 00000 ~0~ ~oooo u ~ z 04 ~ o n r~. 0 ~o~~ oooooo oooooo ooooo ~ oooo~ Z ~ oooooo u o oooooo ooooo o oooooo ooooo o ~~ ooooo ~ o oooooo ooooo ~ ~ oooooo ~~o o oooooo ooooo ~ ~ ~~ ooooo z ~ oooooo ooooo ~ o oooooo ooooo zzzzzz ~~z z 0 ~~0 ~0 ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ zzzzzz~ zzzz ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ 000000 0000~ U 0 U JJ ~ ~0 0 ~~0 ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~0 O ~Z JJJJJJZ ~~Z Z ( ) ~ 0 Z WWZ ~ O~ ~W~~ >>>>~ 0 ~ Z ~ ~ 0 I w Z ~ 0 ~ WZ C) ~I-LL 0 r-- F- (~ z P-. 0 Oeq r-~ i,i C~ Z[S3 6b ITEM NO. DATE' October 20. 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD BID FOR 6" PORTABLE SEWER PUMP TO THOMAS AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE SUM OF $31,284.83 REPORT: Included in the 1999/00 Budget, Account No. 612.3580.800.000, is $34,000 to replace a 1 940's vintage pump now used for emergency pumping in the collection system and at the wastewater treatment plant. Specifications were written and Requests for Quotations through the formal bid process were sent to three suppliers of sewer pumps. The only bid received was from Thomas and Associates for the sum of $31,284.83. There are no known local suppliers of this type of sewer pump. RECOMMENDED ACTION' It is recommended that the City Council award the bid for the portable sewer pump to Thomas and Associates for the sum of $31,284.83. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject the bid and refer back to stafl. Acct. No. (if not budgeted)' N/A Acct. No.- 612.3580.800.000 Appropriation Requested' N/A Citizen Advised' N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by: George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent Coordinated with' Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments' Tabulation of Bids Candace Horsley, C ty Manager I-- C: ITEM NO. 6c DATE: October 20. 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD BID FOR 2-WHEEL DRIVE 3/4 TON PICK-UP TO LASHER AUTO CENTER FOR THE SUM OF $17,080.42 REPORT: Included in the 1999/00 Budget, Account No. 612.3510.800.000, is $22,000 to purchase a new 3/4 ton pick-up for use at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. This pick-up will replace a 1982 1 ton truck now in service. Specifications were written and Requests for Quotations through the formal bid process were sent to fifteen auto and truck dealers. Eleven bids were received on October 12, 1999. The lowest bid was from Lasher Auto Center for the sum of $17,080.42. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award the bid for the 3/4 ton pick-up to Lasher Auto Center for the sum of $17,080.42. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and refer back to staff. Acct. No. (if not budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 612.3580.800.000 Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by: George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Tabulation of Bids Candace Horsley, ~t~Manager Z 13= "3 N 0 0 ITEM NO. 6(~ DATE: October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF LIQUID POLYMER TO STOCKHAUSEN, INC. FOR THE SUM OF $35,417 Each year it is necessary to purchase approximately 90,000 pounds of liquid polymer. Liquid polymer is a coagulant used to aid the filtering of the water at the water treatment plant. This product has proven to provide the most efficient and cost effective filter process. Total quantities are an estimation of annual use. Orders are placed on as needed basis by water treatment plant personnel. $60,000 is budgeted in Account Number 820.3908.520.000 for the purchase of chemicals. Requests for Quotations through the formal bid process were sent to seven chemical suppliers. Five bids were opened by the City Clerk on October 1 2, 1999. The Iow bid is from Stockhausen, Inc with a bid price of $.3935 per pound and a total amount based on estimated usage of $35,417. Staff recommends that City Council award the bid for liquid polymer to Stockhausen, Inc. for the sum of $35,417. There is no known local supplier of this type of chemical. RECOMMENDED ACTION: for the sum of $35,41 7. Award the bid for liquid polymer to Stockhausen, Inc. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject bid and refer back to staff Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by' George Borecky, Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Bid Tabulation o E ~- 0 6 ITEM NO. 6e DATE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES GENERAL OPERATING SUPPORT GRANT (IG-90792-99) The City, through the efforts of the Grace Hudson Museum Staff, has received a new Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) grant. This is the second IMLS allocation, immediately following the grant which closed September 30, 1999. The $51,149 grant is for two years and does not require any local match funding. Since this grant was awarded subsequent to the adoption of the 1999/2000 budget, a budget amendment is necessary to authorize the expenditures and recognize the new revenue. The General Fund is not affected by this amendment. Attachment #1 details the proposed grant expenditures for the remainder of the current fiscal year. The proposed revenue will match the anticipated expenditures. The proposed expenses for the remainder of the current fiscal year are $16,060. Staff is very pleased the Museum is able to continue its efforts toward improving the collection and documenting the archives with this grant and recommends approval of the budget amendment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve amendment to the 1999/2000 budget for the IMLS- GOS Grant #1G-90792-99, increasing revenue in account 143.0600.491.000 by $16,060, and authorizinq expenditures of: $500 in account 143.6166.160.000; $11,9~60 in account 143.6166.250.001, and $3,600 in account 143.6166.690.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: o . Determine modifications to the budget amendment are necessary, identify changes, and approve revised budget amendment. Determine budget amendment is not appropriate and do not approve amendment. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Sherri Smith-Ferri, Museum Director Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer ~ Sherri Smith-Ferri, Museum Director, Larry DeKnoblough, Community Services Director, Gordon Elton, Director of Finance, and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Budget page for new IMLS Grant, Fund 143, page 1. 2. Budget worksheet, page 2. Candace Horsley, City I~anager mfh:asrcc99 10201MLS LLI _ _ e, o~ ~ ~ O~ 0 0 0 O~ ~ _ _ , -o~ o,~~~:oo:'~~ ~ ~__ _~=~_~ ~-~ ~ ~~o ~ ~~ o o o o o 8 o o o o ~ ~= o o888888oo8 808°°°°88. .88° oO ~ · .~ .~ . .oo~s o oooo s~~s .o ~:o ~ ,~~dd ~do4doKK~ ~~d . _ . O0 ~0~00~0~ 0 ~0 0 ~ O00 0000~ 0~~ ~ . .00 . ~ ~ X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~,~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~o~o~o~Od~ooo~oo~oo,~ooo ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~~00 ~0 ' 00~~ ~ d~do~4~d~ ~~~o'd~4~dddo~~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0000 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~,~ ~ 0 ~ ~ od~44~m~mm~m~do~ddodo~m'~ 0 0 ~ o 0 ~ ~ ,.~ , .. ; .. ', ', ~ ', '. i . '., , ', · -- ~ ~ -z~ oO~ ITEM NO. 6f. DATE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF BIDS FOR TWO 500 KVA PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS A Request for Quotation was written to purchase two 500 KVA pad mount transformers. Requests through the formal bid process were sent to four suppliers. Four bids were received and opened by the City Clerk on October 4, 1999, at 2:00 p.m. The transformers were being ordered to meet a customer's need for voltage. The plans have since changed and it will not be necessary to order special transformers as the City is able to use current stock for the project. Thus rejection of all bids is required. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject all bids for two 500 KVA pad mount transformers. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Stan Bartolomei, Electrical Supervisor Judy Jenney, Purchasing and Warehouse Assistant Candace Horsley, City Manager Bid results Cand--ace Horsily, Ci~'y I~anager mfh:asrcc99 1020REJT · BID RESULTS 2 - 500 KVA PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS G. E. SUPPLY WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC WESCO DISTRIBUTION SOUTHCOAST UTILITY SALES $19,259.96 $20,592.00 $20,742.16 NO BID ITEM NO. DATE: 6g October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH THOMAS CONSULTING FOR MANDATED COSTS CLAIMING SERVICES For the past seven years, Thomas Consulting has prepared the reimbursement claims for costs associated with work mandated by the State of California. Each year the State Controller's office sends a list of programs for which reimbursements can be claimed. The claims must be filed at various times during the fiscal year. Claims are made for actual costs, including costs for preparation of the claim documentation, for the prior fiscal year, as well as estimated costs to be incurred n the current fiscal year. Examples of the costs which may be claimed are: Business Tax Reporting, Open Meeting Act, Rape Victim Counseling and Misdemeanor bookings. The eligible services are determined by the State legislature and money must be appropriated to pay the claims. Costs for the proposed agreement are included in the reimbursement request and are paid from the amounts received from the State. Actual reimbursements are received in parts as the State Controller's office reviews the claims and authorizes partial payments. It has taken up to eighteen months before final payment is received on submitted claims. The contractor is paid in two parts. When claims are submitted to the State for reimbursement, the contractor is paid 5% of the claimed amount. When payment is received from the State, the contractor is paid the difference between 10% of the amount received from the State and the initial amount advanced to the contractor. Past performance of Thomas Consulting has been excellent and staff recommends this contractor be retained to prepare the Mandated Cost claims for 1999-2000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Thomas Consulting for Mandated Costs Claiming Services at a rate of 10% of the reimbursements paid to the City by the State. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Not authorize the contract for Mandated Costs Claiming Services. Requested Dy: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Citizens advised: Attachments: APPROVED:' Candace Horsley~ ~ity GE:THOMAS.AGN Gordon Elton, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manger None Contract with Thomas Consulting Manager AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE MANDATED COST CLAIMING SERVICES The City of Ukiah (hereinafter City) and Thomas Professional Services (hereinafter Consultant) jointly agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services The Consultant shall file all the City's claims for funded State mandated costs as provided herein. Costs claimed shall be those actually incurred and estimated costs for those years in all areas appropriated by the State Legislature. . Compensation for Mandated Cost Claiming Services Compensation paid to Consultant by City shall be ten percent (I 0%) of the claims reimbursed by the State to the City under Section I of this agreement. An advance of five percent (5%) of the total claims submitted shall be paid by City to Consultant within thirty (30) days of submittal of the claims by Consultant to the State of California. A final bill shall be submitted by Consultant to City for ten percent (10%) of total claims paid to City by the State, less the five percent (5%) initially advanced to Consultant. . Services and Materials to be Furnished by the City The Consultant shall provide guidance to the City in determining the data required tbr clai~ns submission. The City, following the Consultant's guidance, shall provide assistance in the accumulation of the required data. Accumulated data shall be provided to Consultant in a reasonable amount of time to facilitate timely claims submission. The Consultant shall assume all data so provided to be correct. 4. Not Obligated to Third Parties The City shall not be obligated or liable hereunder to any party other than the Consultant. 5. Com;ultant Liability if Audited The Consultant will assume all financial and statistical information provided to the Consultant by City employees or representatives is accurate and complete. Any subsequent disallowance of funds paid to the City under the claim whatever reason is the sole responsibility of the City. o , o _Consultant Assistance if Audited The Consultant shall make workpapers and other records available to auditors. The Consultant shall provide assistance to the City in defending claims submitted if an audit results in a disallowance of twenty percent (20%) or more of the original claim submitted. Reductions of less than twenty percent (20%) shall not be contested by the Consultant. Indirect Costs The cost claims to be submitted by the Consultant may consist of both direct and indirect costs. The Consultant may either utilize the ten percent (10%) indirect cost rate allowed by the State Controller or calculate a higher rate if City records support such a calculation. The Consultant by this Agreement is not required to prepare a central service cost allocation plan or a departmental indirect cost rate proposal for the City. The City designates the following individual as contact person for this agreement: Name: Title: Address: Telephone: Gordon Elton Finance Director 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482 707/463-6220 Term of Agreement Consultant shall submit claims on a timely basis and in accordance with the deadlines established by the State Controller within each Claiming Instruction notice. The period covered by this Agreement is October 1, 1999 through September 30, 2001. Offer is made by Consultant: DATE: October 13, 1999 Offer is Accepted by City DATE: CITY OF UKIAH BY: Candace Horsley, City Manager ATTEST: BY: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Please Return One Signed copy of Agreement To: THOMAS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 245 So. Sanderson Way Fort Bragg, California 95437 707/964-8874 ITEM NO. 6h DATE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7160 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE AUTHORIZING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON CITY STREETS At the October 6, 1999 City Council meeting the ordinance amending the Municipal Code revising parking restrictions was introduced by a unanimous vote of the four members present. Adoption of the ordinance is now appropriate. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Ordinance Amending Section 7160 of the Ukiah City Code Which Authorizes Parking Restrictions on City Streets. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine the revisions are not to be reduced and do not adopt ordinance. 2. Determine ordinance requires modifications, identify necessary changes, and adopt revised ordinance. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: NA NA Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer David Rapport, City Attorney and Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Ordinance for adoption, pages 1-2. Candace Horsley, City'l~anager mfh:asrcc99 0120CCSA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 7160 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE WHICH AUTHORIZES PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON CITY STREETS. The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE Section 7160 in Chapter 1 of Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code is amended to read as follows: §7160 CITY COUNCIL TO DESIGNATE RESTRICTED OR PROHIBITED PARKING BY RESOLUTION: The City Council, may by resolution, designate any streets or portions of streets so as to prohibit standing, parking or stopping or as being restricted as to the length of time standing or parking shall be permitted in such area. The resolution may also designate that such prohibition or restriction applies between certain hours of the day or night and may provide that certain days shall be excepted from the prohibition or restriction. Unless a resolution specifies otherwise, a prohibition or restriction shall apply on the side of the street where the sign or curb marking is placed and between the two cross streets nearest the sign or marking. A time limit restriction that applies during certain hours shall prohibit parking the same vehicle during those hours in the designated area longer than the allowed duration, even if the vehicle is moved and parked again. If signs establishing the same restriction are posted on both sides of the street, the restriction as described in this section shall apply to both sides of the street. If signs establishing different restrictions are posted on different sides of the same street, each restriction shall apply separately. SECTION TWO This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. SECTION THREE This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption. Introduced by title only on October 6, 1999, by the following roll call vote: ORDINANCE NO. Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AYES: Councilmembers Smith, Baldwin, Ashiku, and Mayor Mastin NOES' None ABSENT: Councilmember Libby ABSTAIN: None Adopted on , by the following roll call vote: AYES' NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Jim Mastin, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Page 2 of 2 ITEM NO. 8 a DATE: October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CITIZEN'S OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) GRANT AWARD AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE OF FUNDS - FISCAL YEAR 1999-00 SUMMARY: The Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee (SLEOC) was established in Mendocino County as a result of the passage of Assembly Bill 3229 during the 1996 legislative session. This program provides additional funding for local law enforcement. The legislation authorized distribution of $256 million to counties, cities, towns, and special districts in California for the 1999- 2000 fiscal year. The program is expected to continue for the next few years. The law requires public notice and a public hearing to consider the planned grant expenses for the coming year. This fiscal year, $33,308.98 was awarded to the City of Ukiah. The Ukiah Police Department plans to use this funding to continue technology upgrades in the area of mobile data communications in direct support of public safety personnel in the field. The expenditures are budgeted in Fund 205, Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funding, but as noted above the specific use of the funds must be authorized by the City Council after a public hearing. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Hold public hearing for the proposed spending plan, and provide the Police Chief with spending authority in the specific use of these funds. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Reject the current proposal. 2. Provide alternate direction to Police Chief Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Public Safety Departments - Police, Fire and Dispatch Chris Dewey - Police Sergeant Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief 1. Excerpt of the adopted budget~ page 1. APPROVED: Horsle nager cd:agsurep COUNGR Z Z 0 d, 0 0 0 0 . .....~ 0 0 0 I-- Z LIJ U.l AGENDA SUMMARY 8b ITEM NO. DATE: October 20, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT (LLEBG 1998) AWARD AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE OF FUNDS. SUMMARY: The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Program was established through the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs. The Office of Justice Programs was created in 1984 by the Justice Assistance Act, to establish partnership arrangements with federal, state, and local agencies to fund and evaluate criminal justice programs. The LLEBG program funding is based upon a city's Uniform Crime Reporting Violent Crime Statistics, and funding is to be used to supplement local law enforcement activities within the community. The law requires public notice and a public hearing to consider the planned expenses of this grant for the coming year. This last fiscal year $17,847 was awarded to the City of Ukiah, with a 10% local match of $1,983, for a total grant award of $19,830. Both revenue and expenses are budgeted in Fund 207, Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, but as noted the specific use of the funds must be authorized by the City Council after a public hearing. The Ukiah Police Department has two years within which to use these funds. The Ukiah Police Department plans to use this funding to continue technology upgrades in the area of mobile data communications in direct support of public safety personnel in the field. In addition, the Department plans to purchase an Officer Training Management System and a Traffic Accident Reporting System. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Hold public hearing for proposed spending plan, and provide the Police Chief with spending authority in the specific use of these funds. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Reject the current proposal. 2. Provide alternate direction to Police Chief Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: cd:agsurep COUNLLI N/A Public Safety Departments - Police, Fire and Dispatch Chris Dewey - Police Sergeant Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief 1. Excerpt of the adopted budget, page 1. Can"d~ce I:tm:s-ley, C~ty~4anager o 6 0 l-- Z icl AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8 c DATE: October 20, 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT (LLEBG 1999) AWARD AND PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC USE OF FUNDS SUMMARY: The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) Program was established through the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs. The Office of Justice Programs was created in 1984 by the Justice Assistance Act, to establish partnership arrangements with federal, state, and local agencies to fund and evaluate criminal justice programs. The LLEBG program funding is based on a city's Uniform Crime Reporting Violent Crime Statistics, and funding is to be used to supplement local law enforcement activities within the community. The law requires public notice and a public hearing to consider the planned expenses of this grant for the coming year. This fiscal year (1999-00), $17,369 is anticipated to be awarded to the City of Ukiah, with a 10% local match of $1,983, for a total grant of $19,299. Notification of this award has been made informally, and formal notification is anticipated to follow soon. The public hearing and Council action is to identify and authorize the specific use of the funds. A budget amendment will be submitted when the formal notice is received and prior to actual expenditure of the funds. The Ukiah Police Department plans to save this funding for future technology upgrades in the area of mobile data communications in direct support of public safety personnel in the field. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Hold public hearing for proposed spending plan, and provide the Police Chief with spending authority in the specific use of these funds. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Reject the current proposal. 2. Provide alternate direction to Police Chief Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: N/A Public Safety Departments - Police, Fire and Dispatch Chris Dewey - Police Sergeant Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief None Candace Horsley, City M~tnager cd:agsurep COUNLL2 ITEM NO. ~ DATE: October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMARY REPORT SUBJECT: COURSE APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ADJUSTING FEES FOR THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL GOLF At the September 1st City Council meeting, staff presented proposed adjustments to the fee schedule for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. One component of the fee adjustment included in the proposal was a three dollar per round fee charged to Annual Membership holders who wish to play on weekends prior to 11 '00 a.m. This option was offered as a means of creating payment flexibility for Annual Members as well as retaining affordability for the weekday golfer. Based upon testimony received at the September Public Hearing opposing this item, the City Council returned the fee adjustment proposal to the Parks, Golf, Recreation, and Golf Commission for an additional hearing and opportunity for the golfers to provide further input. The Commission conducted its meeting on September 21 and has revised its recommendation it is now forwarding to the Council the proposed Resolution Adjusting Fees for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course provided in Attachment #1. An excerpt of the minutes of that meeting is provided in Attachment #2. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION' Adopt Resolution adjusting fees for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine Resolution requires revision and adopt as revised. 2. Determine adoption of resolution is inappropriate at this time and do not move to approve. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Directort~"~}-"- i~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Proposed Resolution and Fee Schedule 2. Excerpt of the September 21, 1999 minutes of the Parks, Recreation, Commission pertaining to Golf fee adjustments 3. Current Resolution and Fee Schedule Candace Horsley, City,Manager LD2 FEES992.ASR and Golf The currently proposed fee adjustment has eliminated the Commission's previous recommendation for the three dollar per round weekend fee and adjusted the annual memberships by an approximate 10% in each category, including Seniors. For example, a single adult membership within the existing schedule is $600. The proposed adjustment at 10% will increase that fee to $660. The singular exception to the increase is the Junior Annual rate which has been retained at its current $175. The Commission also recommended the Junior Monthly rate be retained so that those people who can't afford the lump sum cost of an Annual ticket have a payment option. The Commission did, however, feel strongly that the monthly tickets be increased substantially to encourage the purchase of Annuals which support the Course year round. All Daily rates are being proposed as originally submitted to the Council on September 1st. The complete fee schedule is defined in the attached Resolution. Listed below for the Council' s review are a comparison of the proposed and current fee schedule. PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE CURRENT SCHEDULE Daily Fees Daily Fees Daily Fees Daily Fees Fee Catego~ Monday - Thursday Friday - Sunday Monday-Thursday Friday-Sunday A. 9 Holes $12.00 $15.00 $11.00 $13.00 Senior $11.00 $15.00 $10.00 $13.00 B. 18 Holes $18.00 $21.00 $16.00 $18.00 Senior (60 and over) $13.00 $21.00 $12.00 $18.00 Junior (17 and under) $ 6.00 $21.00 $ 6.00 $ 8.00 $ 8.00 after 11:00 a.m. C. Twilight $10.00 $12.00 $ 9.00 $10.00 Super Twilight $ 7.00 $10.00 $ 7.00 $ 8.00 Junior Twilight $ 4.00 $ 6.00 $ 4.00 $ 6.00 D. Annual Membership Adult $660.00 $600.00 Adult Couples $1,000.00 $925.00 Senior $495.00 $450.00 Senior Couples $825.00 $750.00 Jumor $175.00 $175.00 m. Monthly Pass Adult $150.00 $85.00 Senior $115.00 $77.00 Junior $ 40.00 $40.00 F. Punchcards (10 rounds) $150 plus $3 per round on Fri-Sun $140.00 plus $2.00 per round on weekends G. Annual Cart Path Access $175.00 $160.00 H. Cart Storage Gas $ 20 Same Electric $ 25 Same The proposed fee adjustments are being presented to the Council with a joint recommendation for approval by staff and the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission. Attachment RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADJUSTING FEES FOR THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE 4 WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah operates and maintains the Municipal Golf Course for the use of the Ukiah community and general regional area; and 5 WHEREAS, the City Council may from time to time consider fee adjustments in order to 6 continue operation of the Golf Course in a fiscally responsible manner; and 7 WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission has recommended approval of the fee adjustments contained herein; and 8 WHEREAS, said fee adjustments have been legally published and made available for 9 public review. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following rates are hereby established for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course: 10 11 Daily Fees Daily Fees 12 Fee Category_ Monday - Thursday. Friday - Sunday 13 A. 9 Holes $12.00 $15.00 Senior $11.00 $15.00 14 15 16 17 B. 18 Holes Senior (60 and over) Junior (17 and under) C. Twilight 18 (12:00 p.m. ST) (1:00 p.m. DST) 19 Super Twilight (3:00 p.m. ST) 20 (5:00 p.m. DST) Junior Twilight 21 (2:00 p.m.) 22 23 24 Membership and Monthly Fees 25 $18.00 $13.00 $ 6.OO $21.00 $21.00 $21.00 before 11:00 a.m. $ 8.00 after 11:00 a.m. and on Mother's and Father's Day O. $10.00 $ 7.O0 $ 4.oo $12.00 $10.00 $ 6.oo Annual Membership* Adult Adult Couples Senior Senior Couples Junior 26 E. Monthly Pass Adult 27 Senior Junior $660 $1,000 $495 $825 $175 28 $150 $115 $ 40 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fee Category_ Daily Fees Monday- Thursday F. Punchcards (10 rounds) O. m. Annual Cart Path Access Cart Storage** Gas Electric Daily Fees Friday- Sunday Memberships and Monthly Fees $150 plus $3 per round on Fri-Sun $175 $ 20 $ 25 *Annual Memberships are effective July 1 through June 30 of each year and due and payable prior to July 1. Members paying in full prior to July 1 shall receive a 5% discount. **Carts in storage must possess a current Cart Path Access Permit. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of October, 1999, by the following roll call vote: AYES' NOES: ABSENT' ATTEST: Jim Mastin, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk LD4 fees992.res Attachment #2 Commissioner Henderson stated "children" should have access to the River and it is his contention the City Staff proceed with correcting any negative proponents and/or concerns in connection with the project and its approval. Commissioner Mulheren stated it would be more feasible and/or cost effective to build three soccer fields as opposed to one soccer field should the City's Park plans be able to provide for such accommodations. Commissioner Ramsey stated the addition of more than one soccer field and additional play areas would create traffic problems in this area. He noted the proposed Park pond would require circulation by way of river diversion or an alternative method wherein the pond does not become stagnate. He supports the fish enchancement concept and the need for public access to including fishing and other recreational activities on the Russian River. Chairman Johnson expressed her proposed Park concerns with regard to traffic congestion, security, trespassing/vandalism, the guaranteeing, monitoring and reinforcement of River non- commercial canoeing, liability issues, additional City Parks and Recreation maintenance/repair costs, and continued granting funding. She stated the Refined Concept Plan is "wonderful," but there are the above-referenced issues and/or concerns which need to be addressed. Mr. Stump took the opportunity to thank the Commissioners and audience participants for their input and stated the above-referenced comments and proposal will be presented to the City Council on October 6, 1999, as a public hearing/informational item. b. Status Report on Ukiah Country Pumpkinfest 1999 Mr. Sangiacomo stated briefly the Ukiah County Pumpkinfest plans are progressing and this annual event will take place on October 30 & 31, 1999. C. Report on Fall 1999 Recreation Class Guide Mr. Sangiacomo stated with reference to the 1999 Autumn Recreation Class Guide has many participants and continues to offer a variety of classes, which appeal to the public interests and is currently being distributed. OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion of Golf Course Fee Adjustment Community Services Director DeKnoblough reviewed the Municipal Golf Course Fee Adjustment as outlined in his Memorandum to the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission, dated September 13, 1999. He stated at the August 18 meeting the City Council reviewed the proposal for Golf Course fee adjustments which were unanimously approved and forwarded by the Commission. A copy of the Golf Course fee adjustments discussion and recommendation by the Commissioners as outlined in the Commission minutes of June 15, 1999, is incorporated herein by reference as "attachment 1." He further stated the City Council did not approve the fee proposal but rather moved to return the item to the Commission for an additional hearing. He noted the Council did not disagree with the proposed Golf Course fee adjustment as recommended by the Commissioners Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Page 10 September 21, 1999 and Staff, but requested the Park, Recreation, and Golf Commission, based upon testimony by several members of the Ukiah Men's Golf Club, provide an opportunity for additional public input on this matter. The purpose of tonight's hearing is to reopen to the public the Golf Course fee adjustment discussion. He reported the primary concern expressed to the Council by the Men's Club members was the proposed $3 per round weekend fee which would have been attached to the Annual Memberships. It was noted the concept behind this fee was to increase revenues during peak playing periods while offering the option of Iow cost play during the week. Those opposed to this fee felt it unfairly targets the annual members and would unreasonably increase their costs. Many Golf Club members who testified before the Council regarding the aforementioned matter, indicated a clear preference for a flat increase, although no specific percentage was identified. The Commissioners may determine to adhere to their original recommendation or adopt an alternative schedule based upon tonight's discussion and public input. Staff continues to recommend support for the per round fee concept as being the most equitable and consistent with industry practice. Staff's the primary concern is the current projected operational deficit of $57,507. Mr. DeKnoblough reiterated the Commission consider the "bottom line" to include basic cost of operations and long term Golf Course plans for improvements. He stated the basic cost of operations is determined by the approved expenditure budget of $535,207 for Fiscal Year 1999/2000 and to "bear in mind" the net revenue which may be gained by any increase in per round fees. He further noted the Golf Course has a fund balance of $97,481, which will decline significantly without revenue adjustments. Without a stable fund balance improvements to the Course, purchase of improved equipment, and adequate staffing cannot occur. The immediate purpose of this hearing is to determine a fair and reasonable as well as effective fee adjustment to offset an operational deficit as reiterated above. He drew attention to his Memorandum to the City Manager, dated August 16, 1999, regarding a survey of other regional golf course fees assessed as a means of fee comparisons between the different courses. He noted the significant disparity between the fees charged in Ukiah and other public Courses nearby. He stated, in conclusion, for the Commission to consider what is the actual fair market value for the quality golf product offered on the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course and for the golfing community to support the City in its effort to maintain this product. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:16 p.m. Jim Brown, Ukiah, expressed his concern regarding the $3 weekend per round fee in accordance with those golfers who have an annual membership. He stated the proposed $3 per round fee is similar to the addition of a "surcharge" to the existing annual membership, which is an unreasonable concept. He noted an annual membership fee is paid once a year and should be considered as such without any additional golfing fees. He further noted the recommended Golf Course fee adjustment allows the Senior citizen the option of play during the week without any additional fee as a means for avoidance of the weekend $3 per round fee implementation. It was noted the working public can only play on weekends and are not given any fee options. Bob Mort, Ukiah, stated he is a Senior citizen who works during the week and has the opportunity to play only on the weekends. He stated he supports a Golf Course fee increase, but he opposes the $3 weekend per round fee for those golfers who have an annual membership. He also stated the annual membership fee is beneficial to the golfers who must work during the week and the Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Page 11 September 21, 1999 addition of a weekend $3 per round fee would require the annual membership golfers to pay more money to play golf. It was noted the annual membership payment represents a significant amount of revenue generated in one lump sum for the Golf Course. Don Crawford, Ukiah, commented he took "offense" to the City Council's insinuations regarding the public's lack of organization and/or a specific fee schedule recommendations for the proposed increase in golf fees. He stated the Commissioners did not represent the best interests of the golfing community with referenced to the proposed increased golf fees. He noted he pays for an annual membership which should guarantee him the opportunity to play golf at any time during a given year. He stated he finds assessing those golfers who pay an annual membership fee a $3 weekend per round fee to be "insulting." He stated golfer who have purchased an annual membership should be given preferential treatment for payment of such a fee. He stated he favors an overall Golf Course fee increase, but such an increase should be "in the form of an increase in the total cost as opposed to a punitive increase directed toward certain people." He stated the daily golfer should pay a ten percent increase and the annual membership fee user pay a five percent increase. The annual membership fee player is the player who financially supports the Golf Course throughout the year. He noted the drainage issue as referenced in Mr. DeKnoblough's Memorandum to the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission, dated September 13, 1999, has been an ongoing problem due to the Course's close proximity to nearby springs and the creek which runs through it. He noted the drainage problem is an expensive and insurmountable task to solve, which can be accomplished in places where the drainage problems are most prevalent and most cost effectively to correct. A general discussion followed regarding the approximate number of times a working Senior golfer has the opportunity to play with reference to payment of the additional weekend $3 per round fee in terms of whether the increased cost is really significant. Hal Bray, Ukiah stated the annual membership fee golfer is an "easy target" for revenue generation as opposed to placing the Golf Course expenditure burden on the daily players. He stated such golfers do not play golf year around due to weather conditions and/or a particular player's work schedule and this money financially assists the Golf Course operation and/or expenditures. He noted the daily rate play is reduced considerably during the winter months where the annual membership fee purchasers' money continue to financially support the Golf Course. Commissioner Hefte drew attention to the recommended Golf Course fee adjustment as presented to the City Council on August 8, 1999, as being "a joint effort" to the best of the Commission's ability to present the most equitable solution to increase Golf Course revenue without attempting to target, financially, any particular player. She stated the Commissioner made a mistake and the public participants at the City Council hearing were dissatisfied with the recommended fee increase with reference to the weekend $3 per round fee. Don Rones, Ukiah, proposed the Commissioners make a revised Golf Course fee adjustment schedule. Commissioner Nielson stated she proposed a fair increase would be "ten percent across the board" for the annuals with the "regular couple" exception who are not Seniors. She stated in the past, Seniors were targeted with golf fee increases. It was her recommendation to incorporate with Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission September 21, 1999 Page 12 regard to the annuals, in lieu of the $3 weekend per round fee, to increase the fee from the existing $600 fee to $660 for the regular Adult Annual Membership. She further recommends with reference to the Annual Membership for Adult Couples, increase from the existing fee $925 to $1,000. She recommends with regard to Annual Membership for Seniors to increase ten percent from the existing fee $450 to $495. She recommends with regard to Annual Membership for Senior Couples to increase from the existing fee $750 to $825. She stated the Annual Membership for the Juniors should remain at the exiting fee of $175 first child & $150 per additional child. She recommends the Monthly Membership with regard to Adults should increase from the existing fee of $85 to $150. She recommends Monthly Membership with regard to Seniors increase from the existing fee of $77 to $100. She recommends Monthly Membership regarding Juniors increase from the existing fee of $40 to $50 after 11:00 a.m. She recommends with regard to Daily rates, a ten percent increase, rounded to the nearest dollar. She stated she supports Daily fees remain as recommended in the Golf Course fee adjustment scheduled as referenced in "Attachment 1" or (Page 8, Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Minutes of June 15, 1999). She further stated with regard to "off season" ticket holders, some golfers were opposed to this recommendation. She noted with regard to a "seasonal ticket holder," such a golfer paying $150 for six months would pay $900 annually, which is more than the Annual Senior fee. She stated, in her opinion, this recommendation is a "good" proposal for the Senior as well as for a Regular Annual golfer who would pay $660. She noted if a golfer plays twice a week or eight times a month with a proposed $20 fee weekend rate for six months, this player would pay a total of $960. She reported ten percent Golf Course fee increases are not out of proportion. She stated with regard to the Punch Cards as referenced in the recommended fee adjustment schedule in "Attachment 1" (Page 9, Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Minutes of June 15, 1999) $150 for ten punches is reasonable wherein essentially this player is gaining a $2 weekend rebate by playing for $18 on weekends and/or a $3 weekend increase as opposed to $20, if the $20 rate is again proposed. Diane Bray, Ukiah, stated if the monthly ticket is made less attractive, then there would be more annual tickets purchased to financially support the Golf Course all year. She noted a problem exists wherein with reference to Senior Couples, if one player is a Senior and the other is not. She stated she favors incorporating fee increases for the players "out of the County." It was noted the aforementioned regarding increased fees for "out of County" players is not a good proposal, which resulted in a significant drop in the number of "out of County" players. It was also noted by Staff implementing a resident versus non-resident fee is not financially practical. Commissioner Hefte commented a ten percent increase is too much, but recommended a more reasonable five percent increase. She proposed adopting the recommended Dailies categories as proposed by the Commissioners on Page 8 of the June 15, 1999 minutes, and increasing the other categories by five percent. A general discussion followed regarding a 10 percent increase in certain fee categories as opposed to a five percent increase. It was noted by Staff the $3 weekend per round fee was originally an attempt to equitably distribute an increase in order to maximize revenues at premium tee times. Staff noted the City is receptive to alternative proposals in order to satisfy the present $23,000 Golf Course deficit. A general discussion followed regarding other golf course fee schedule comparisons. Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Page 13 September 21, 1999 Don Rones, Ukiah, stated the Ukiah Men's Golf Club supports a ten percent fee increase "across the board" and round the particular golf category fees to the nearest dollar. It was noted should the Commission and the public fail to agree on fair and reasonable fee increases, the City Council will implement fee increases, accordingly. Another recommendation was to incorporate a ten percent increase "across the board" with regard to the golfing categories except the Dailies pay a flat $20 fee. Commissioner Ramsey recommended no Junior golf category fee increases, implement a 10% fee increase "across the board," and reinstate the Monthly ticket. Golf Pro McMillan stated whatever fee structure is recommended the schedule should be kept "simple" and he stated a ten percent (rounding to the nearest dollar value) increase "across the board" is fair and reasonable with the exception of the Junior category, whereupon a particular player has the option of choosing the golfing category which best benefits his/her needs. Mr. DeKnoblough reported with regard to revenues, the Golf Course accrues $100,000 annually in membership fees. He drew attention that ten percent of $100,000 totals $10,000 wherein the remaining amount of $13,000 (of the current Fiscal Year $23,000 deficit) can be made up by other revenues and a $20 daily fee would make up this difference. He expressed his concern for the Dailies category adjustments as there exists a difference between the weekday dailies as opposed to the weekend Dailies. He noted there should be a much wider gap between the weekday and weekend Dailies wherein a $2 separation is not enough money. He stated $13,000 in revenue must be accrued in order to accommodate the Annual Membership fees and he recommends increasing the weekend Dailies by a significantly greater amount. The majority of the weekday rounds are played by members, but the weekend time is considered "prime time" wherein additional revenue is generated for the Golf Course. He proposed the Commissioners recommend a Golf Course fee adjustment schedule for a multi- year operational plan regarding long-term revenue projections based on number of rounds played and community growth anticipation. He noted the Golf Course should incorporate a Capital Fund account, which can be used for some future improvements and equipment purchases, but it is considered a "reserve" fund. Golf Course fee increases should be structured appropriately to ensure the Course can pay needed operational Course improvements, additional staffing, equipment purchases, and other Course maintenance/repair costs without utilizing and/or depleting the Capital Fund account for operational funding. He stated, ideally, he would like the Golf Course to have a Reserve Fund of $250,000 whereupon such funds would assist in specific capital Course improvements each year and the Fund be "interest earning." He noted there exists $100,000 in the Reserve Fund which has been accumulated over the past two years through expenditure cuts. He further noted the Golf Course is not annually losing money. Don Rones stated he supports with regard to the aforementioned comments, an overall Golf Course fee adjustment as opposed to targeting specific golfing category classifications. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:02 p.m. A general discussion following with reference to reinstatement of the Monthly category and the fees which should be assessed for each classification to include Adult, Senior, and Junior. Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission September 21, 1999 Page 14 Mr. DeKoblough noted "Monthly Membership" fees are considered "discount tickets," and the importance of this particular category exists in "how deep is the discount as well as the value of the discount." It was previously noted in other Commission discussions "Monthly Membership" do not make a significant contribution to Course revenue year around. Commissioner Ramsey stated he supports reinstatement of the "Monthly Membership" provided there is an increase. Mr. DeKnoblough stated what is "killing Course revenue" is the opportunity for golfers to play at a discount, which incorporates approximately 80 percent of rounds played. Staff and the Commissioners through concession recommends to the City Council the approval of the following Golf Fee Adjustments: 1. A ten percent Golf Course Fee Adjustment for all categories, with the exception of the "Junior" category; Annual Membership: Adult- $660 Adult Couples - $1,000 Senior- $495 Senior Couples - $825 Junior - no change; 2. Monthly Membership (Reinstated): Adults - $150 Senior - $115 Junior - $40, $50 after 11:00 a.m. on weekends with the exception of Mother's and Father's Day; 3. Dailies: Weekend Dailies - $21 Weekday Dailies - $18; 4. Punch Cards: $150 plus $3 per round on weekends $140 for "Junior" after 11:00 a.m. on weekends; 5. Yearly Cart-Path: $175. It was noted in the above-reference discussion, the full rate payers, the weekday and weekend Dailies contribute 60-65% to Golf Course revenue and, therefore, Golf Course Adjustment Fees has become an equity issue. Commissioner Hefte noted the manner in which the fees are scheduled the Annual Membership golfers do have preferential treatment with regard to prime playing time and she further noted 80 percent of the budget revenue is paid by the Dailies. She inquired regarding the reason why the Monthly Membership golfers are being targeted into purchasing an Annual Membership or to play golf as a Daily. Mr. DeKnoblough replied the issue is "selling the heart of the season" to gain financial support from golfers during the months when golfing is at a minimum. The Annual Membership fee pays revenue for the entire year. He further stated increasing the Monthly Membership as referenced above is Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission September 21, 1999 Page 15 one method of "tightening up the fee schedule" to accommodate the wide variety of discount levels available to the golfer. It was noted some Monthly ticket holders choose to purchase monthly as opposed to paying an Annual Membership fee because these golfers do not have the money to purchase the one lump sum of $600 and end up paying more to golf. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Henderson, it was carried by the following roll call vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council the approval of a ten percent increase and rounding the fees to the nearest dollar amount for all Annual Membership categories, as outlined and discussed above. Ayes: Commissioners Nielson, Ramsey, Mulheren, Henderson and Chairman Johnson. Noes: Commissioner Hefte Absent: Commissioner Koeppel Abstain: None ON A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Ramsey, it was carried by an all .AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council the reinstatement of the Monthly Membership to include Adults $150, Senior $100, Junior $40, except $50 after 11:00 a.m. on weekends, as outlined and discussed above. ON .A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Henderson, it was carried by an all .AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council Punch Cards be increased to $150 plus $3 per round on the weekend, as outlined and discussed above. ON .A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Ramsey, it was carried by an all .AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council Monthly Membership be reinstated to include Adult $150, Senior $115, and Junior, no change except $50 after 11:00 a.m. on weekends with no weekend extra charge on Mother's and Father's Day, as outlined and discussed above. ON .A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Ramsey, it was carried by the following roll call vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council Yearly Cart-Path increase to $175, as outlined and discussed above. Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Commissioners Nielson, Ramsey, Mulheren, Henderson, and Chairman Johnson Commissioner Hefte Commissioner Koeppel None ON .A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Ramsey, it was carried by an all .AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council Monthly Cart Storage Fees, Gas and Electric, no change as originally proposed in the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission minutes of June 15, 1999. ON .A MOTION by Commissioner Nielson and seconded by Commissioner Ramsey, it was carried Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Page 16 September 21, 1999 by an all .AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend to the City Council the Adult Daily 9 Hole increased to $12, Senior Daily 9 Hole increased to $11, and Adult and Senior 9 Hole on weekends increased to $15, as originally proposed in the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission minutes of June 15, 1999. It was noted the City Council appreciates the time and effort by the Commissioners for their Golf Course adjustment fee proposals as previously submitted. A summarized copy of the proposed Golf Course Adjustment fee schedule as outlined and discussed above is hereby referenced as "Attachment 2." I. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Chairman Johnson states she appreciates the courtesy call to remind Commissioners of the hearing. It was noted in a January 1999 Resolution to the City Council, there was written documentation regarding payment of the Annual Membership in one lump sum to include a five percent discount for those golfers who pay ahead of the deadline. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission adjourned at 9:31 p.m. SUSAN JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN Catherine L. Elawadly, Recording Secretary 6:gc/092199.min Minutes of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Page 17 September 21, 1999 Attachment 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 RESOLUTION NO. .97-76_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADJUSTING FEES FOR THE tJKIAH MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah operates and maintains the Municipal Golf Course for the use of the Ukiah community and regional area; and WHEREAS, the City Council may from time to time consider fee adjustments in order to continue operation of the Golf Course in a fiscally responsible manner; 25 26 27 and WHEREAS, The City of Ukiah Golf Committee has considered fees at a special meeting of April 28, 1997, at 6:00 p.m.; and WHEREAS, the following fee adjustments have been legally published and made available for public review. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the following rates are hereby established for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course: Daily Fees Daily Fees Mo?__~da~ ~unda~L Bo 9 Holes $11.00 $13.00 Senior $10.00 $13.00 C, III 18 Holes $16.00 $18.00 Senior $12.00 $18.00 Junior* $ 6.00 $ 8.00 Twilight (3:00 P.M.) Super Twilight (5:30 P.M.) Junior Twilight (2:00 P.M.) 9.00 $10.00 7.00 8.00 4.00 6.00 Annual Membership Fees _ -- 28 III 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 25 27 28 Golf Course C~tegor_y. Daily Fees Daily Fees _IVI o n~_d_ay-T h ~ ~ r_sd a_Y Friday-Sunday D, Annual Membership Adult Adult Couples Senior Senior Couples Junior Annual Membership Fees $60O $925 $450 5750 5175 first child and $150 per additional child E, Monthly Membership Adult Senior Junior 'Junior- 18 years and under F. Punch Cards 585 $77 540 5140 ·plus $2 per round on weekends Go Ho Yearly Cart-Path Monthly Cart Storage Fees Gas Electric PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 5160 520 525 , 1997, by the following roll call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk · . ITEM NO.: 8e DATE: October 20, 1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 99-28 SUMMARY: On September 22nd of this year, the Ukiah Planning Commission considered Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28, which would allow the construction of a three-story, 30-unit apartment building on a 1.04-acre parcel in the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District (see Planning Report in attachment 6 for complete details). After conducting a public hearing, the Commission approved the Negative Declaration prepared for the project, but denied the site development permit. This denial was based on concerns that, due to its height and mass, the proposed apartment building would not be compatible with the one-story single family residences located on abutting parcels and could cut out light on the parcel to the north. The Commission also expressed concern that the proposed open space and landscape planter areas would not be large enough to provide sufficient planting areas for trees that would be large enough to screen the structure, and that the project would generate additional traffic that would cause inconveniences or hazards for vehicle drivers and pedestrians in the area. These concerns are spelled out in findings 1-6 in the motion for project denial, as stated in the draft minutes of the Planning Commission meeting (attachment 5, page 8). (continued on next page) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Uphold the Appeal and approve Negative Declaration No. 99-28 and Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28 (attached), based on findings 1-9 on attachment 6, pages 4 through 5, and subject to conditions 1-21 on attachment 6, pages 6 through 8. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY ACTION: 1. Deny the Appeal and sustain the action of the Planning Commission. Public Notice: Publicly noticed in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Bob Axt Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Attachments: , 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Candace ity Letter of Appeal Project Location Map Site Plan Elevations & Floor Plan Planning Commission Minutes, dated September 22, 1999 Planning Report with Negative Declaration/Initial Study, dated September 16, 1999 Manager After reviewing the Planning Commission's list of concerns, Planning staff acknowledges the proposed apartment building would be much taller and much larger in mass than the one-story single family structures located on abutting parcels. However, staff also determined the proposed structure would be consistent with all applicable development standards for the R-3 Zoning District and includes various design feat~'es that would effectively reduce the box-like and massive appearance of the building. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that the size differential between the proposed building and the residential buildings to the south do not establish an incompatibility between the structures, although it does provide a dramatic example of the range of structural possibilities allowed in the R-3 district. In fact, the proposed apartment building might simply be the first multiple-family residential structure in an area where allowed development may make this size the norm instead of an aberration. Therefore, staff does not agree with the Commission that the building would have a detrimental effect on the existing neighborhood. The Planning Commission also cited lack of open space and the use of planting areas that are too small as other reasons for the project denial. However, Planning staff notes the proposed landscaping complies fully with the landscape standards for the R-3 Zoning District, including landscaping on twenty percent (20%) of the site and live landscaping on half this area. Extensive amounts and varieties of vegetation would be planted in the planter areas, including 38 trees intended to screen the proposed apartment building and provide shade over a 3,000 square foot open space/recreation area and parking lots surfaces. These trees include four species known for moderate to rapid growth, growth heights of 40-90 feet, and canopies that would be wide enough to screen most of the proposed building elevations. Based on this landscape plan, staff does not concur with the Planning Commission's findings that the trees would not be large enough to screen the 36-foot high structure, or that the plan does not contain sufficient open space or landscape areas in relation to the proposed structure. Another reason cited by the Planning Commission for denial of the project is the contention that the roofline of the proposed apartment building would cut out light on the parcel to the north. Planning staff used standard shadow templates to determine the 36-foot high roof would cause shadows on the property to the north, which is occupied by single-story buildings for the Ukiah Adult School. However, staff noted the most intense shading on the abutting lot would be less than 50 feet wide during winter months when the sun is lowest, and that it would be even less intense on the abutting parcel throughout the majority of the year. Therefore, shade from the building is not expected to cause the loss of passive solar heating potential or other detrimental effects. In fact, it is unlikely that shade from the building would exceed the shadows already caused by a line of trees growing along the southern boundary of the parcel bordering the project site. Planning staff also reanalyzed potential adverse traffic impacts cited by the Planning Commission, and confirmed that traffic from the apartment building would be a relatively minor increase of approximately 180 vehicle trip ends (vte) per day. Based on this traffic volume, staff sees no compelling reason to change its conclusion that the increase in traffic would not cause substantial traffic problems for vehicle and pedestrian traffic in the area. Nuisance-type impacts would be caused by traffic exiting the site, but staff stands by the City Engineer's determination that these impacts would be minor in nature and more prone to affect persons using the project site. Staff also notes that the applicants intend to develop an egress-only driveway on the east side of the project that should provide some relief from anticipated nuisance impacts. Therefore, Planning Department staff cannot support the Planning Commission's contention that traffic impacts would not substantially affect the vehicle and pedestrian traffic patterns on adjacent roads or intersections. Last, as a matter of principle, staff would like to reiterate that the project site was rezoned to the R- 3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District as part of the City-wide, City-initiated rezoning program which emanated from the adoption of the General Plan in late 1995. Indeed, a lower density zone (R-2) was originally proposed for this site as part of the rezoning program, and both the Planning Commission and the City Council decided the site was more ideally suited to higher density development and use. Moreover, as part of an update of the City's zoning code, the Council adopted standards and criteria for all the residential zoning districts, including the R-3 district, which establish the building height, bulk, scale, and setbacks anticipated within any given district. Therefore, the land use planning standards for development on this site have been well established by previous City actions, and, since the project meets or exceeds these guidelines, staff believes the project warrants Council approval. CONCLUSIONS: Planning staff does not concur with the findings made by the Planning Commission in support of its denial of this project and stands by its initial recommendation for the approval of the project based on the findings contained in the Planning Report (attachment number 6). T I CHELL ARCHITECTS~PLANNERS (707) 462-8778 FAX (707) 462-1511 135 WEST GOBBI STREET, SUITE 205 UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482-5465 September 30, 1999 · 0 C I .-- L' 1999 el'P/OF UI(IAII PLANNING DEPI'. City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Lane Ukiah, CA 95482 Attention: City Council Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision 99-28 . . . City Council Members: We appeal the decision of the Planning Commission on the general basis that the project meets all conditions set by the adopted General Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ukiah. We also submit the following specifics to support our position: The project is not adjacent to single-family areas. It is over 250' from any single-family units, over 150' from the Jack Simpson Apartments to the east and over 90' from Peugh's duplex. A review of traffic patterns (available entrance from Low Gap and exit from Bush Street) shows there will be minimal impact on Bush/Low Gap traffic. At 35' in height, the building is only 5' taller than the Jack Simpson apartment. The building designed includes long facades with articulated roofs and balconies so that shape, shade and volumes will furnish a more pleasing and less massive appearance than the Simpson Apartments, with its flat surfaces continuous both sides, set back 10' kom an R-1 development. City of Ukiah Council Membe, s 09/3O/99 Page 2 . At 10,300 square feet, the proposed building footprint is smaller than the Simpson apartments on a larger property. . At 220', the building is 20' less in length than the Simpson apartments and in general presents its side views to the public. 7. See the attached sheet for additional information. In general, where appropriate (not looking down on R-1 backyards), three-story structures will leave more open space for landscaping and recreation than two-story structures. I am concerned that upholding the Planning Commission's decision will set a precedent not in Ukiah's best interest, either causing development to cover more of the land or reducing the number of units available for housing, a serious problem in our Community that was appropriately addressed when this property was designated for high density residential development. Respectfully submitted, PdVIA/db enclosures e: R. Rinehart P.T. Allred PM AXT & MITCHELL 30-~IT APAR'IS[~FS IAOORE$$: .... _.Lc~v~. Gap P~ad- ~i~ California ~~ ~t O.~.: 30 Sent. 1~9 P~.lo, 1 ~ FRANK ZEEK SCHOOL Ll I~'l Al4 AD~ L,T' VlhlEWO(JD PARK UKIAH MUN,CIPAL GOLF COURSE ./ ,, ./ p OMILITA sCHOOL LAND AREA # Of UNITS FOOTPRINT LAND/UNIT LOT COVERAGE (~" PROPOSED -- 45,312 sq. ft. 30 ; 10,300 sq. ft. 1,510.4 sq. ft./U 22.7% BIMP$ON APTS. 51,300 sq. ff. 34 13,500 sq. ft. 1,508.8 sq. ft.lU 26.3% I-3 LOCATION MAP MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 99-28:ALLRED 509 Low Gap Road (Assessor Parcel Nos. 001-430-17) I ! FRANK VI,"I ~,.'¢OO D PARX NICIPAL )URSE O, 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Feet SCALE: I inch = 500 feet 3-1 _ '1 I ' 2 Z · and a loft, which can be utilized as a third bedroom. Staff further clarified the plans originally submitted included a one-stow unit, but the application submitted to the Commissioners in a revised form did include a loft. Staff noted when the plans were submitted, the "loft" was not described specifically as a bedroom. Ms. Pruden reiterated the plans submitted were clearly labeled as a two bedroom triplex and she stated there is no indication other than a facade modification or slight change in elevation to suggest the project was "anything else" but a single-story, two bedroom triplex, Ms. Pruden stated it was her understanding the Commissioners were approving a single-story, two bedroom triplex, in the plans as originally submitted. Commissioner Correll recommends modification to Condition of Approval No.15 to include the addition of two trees, one to be planted on the northwest corner in front of the existing one bedroom unit and a second tree to be planted at the north corner of the trash receptacles. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote to recommend approval for Major Site Development Permit No. 99-38, as originally submitted to include a single-story, two bedroom triplex by Ernie Fine with modification to Condition of Approval No. 15, based on Findings Nos. 1-9 and Conditions of Approval Nos. 1-21, as outlined and discussed above. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Correll, Puser, Pruden Commissioner Chiles and Chairman Larson None None 8D. Major site Development Permit No. 99-28, as submitted by Timm AIIred, to allow the construction of a three-story, 30 unit apartment building on a 1.04 acre parcel. Located at 509 Low Gap Road (Assessor Parcel No. 001-430-17); zoned R-3 (High Density Residential). Associate Planner Lohse reviewed the staff report and reported the Planning Department recommends approval of the Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Major Development Permit No. 99-28 based on Findings 1-4 and Major Development Permit No. 99-28 based on Findings 1-10 and subject to Conditions of Approval 1-21 on the grounds the proposed apartment building would be consistent with the goals and policies of the High Density Residential land use classification of the Ukiah General Plan and the use and development standards for the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. He reviewed the proposed project wherein an Initial Study was prepared by the Planning Department. Staff determined in this study the development of the apartment complex could cause significant potential adverse impacts to soil and water resources in the area, and mitigation measures to reduce to less than significant levels as outlined in the Initial Study and as recommended in the project's Conditions of Approval. Staff is also recommending the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 18 September 22, 1999 Mr. Lohse further reviewed the project according to the provisions outlined in the City of Ukiah Planning Department Report, dated September 16, 1999, with regard to the Project Description and Staff's Analysis to include the project's issues concerning Environmental issues, General Plan Consistency, Consistency with HDR Zoning District Standards, Parking, Landscaping, and Building Design. This Planning Report is incorporated herein by reference as Agenda Item 8 D. He noted with regard to Condition of Approval No. 16, Staff recommends modification to read: "Landscaping on the project site shall include a majority of four deciduous trees that are either native to the Ukiah area or adapted to its climate, and shall be 15 gallons or more in size." Planning Commissioner questions to Planning Staff: Chairman Larson inquired whether the applicant has successfully negotiated with the Ukiah Unified School District (UUSD) for an easement that would allow the development of a pedestrian access and an exit-only driveway across the property to the east. Mr. Lohse commented there is no official signed agreement with the UUSD, but there exists an indication from the UUSD staff they are amenable to the use of the aforementioned property for allowing pedestrian access and an exit-only driveway on their property. It was noted the proposed easement can be made a Condition of Approval for the project, but Staff did not specifically recommend the additional of another condition because Staff did not feel it was necessary for safe egress of people. It was noted the City Fire Department supports the single-access concept. Commissioner Correll commented it was his understanding 28 apartments units was the maximum allowed on a acre and inquired to Staff why the project recommends approval of 30 units. Staff replied the proposed project is on a 1.04 acre parcel, which calculates to 30 units. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 10:25 p.m. Bob Axt, 135 West Gobbi Street, architect, stated there are two project plans to include one plan which indicates units with walk-up stairs and another plan which indicates the project is a three-story building with elevator, corridors, and access. The latter plan, as requested by the applicant, is the plan subject to approval at tonight's hearing. He presented a brief summary of the project with regard to neighborhood compatibility issues, the apartment beneficial aspects, and building aesthetic/design techniques to include "shadow" and to "break up the wall" by moving the walls in and out as they proceed across the face of the building. He noted the units will face the south and the use of "solar control" will be implemented for all units. He further noted with regard to the landscape plan, all trees would be deciduous. He stated his plans demonstrate the required 24 foot wide access, which ingress and egresses throughout the entire property's length. He noted the building is intended to be entirely Class B, accessible within the "ADA" codes. He further noted there exists two code classes of accessibility for residential dwelling units. Class A is for severely handicapped who require assistance. Class B which allows accessibility through the doors (2 feet 8 inches wide) and a space for a 30 by 48 inch footprint for a wheelchair in front of any MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 19 September 22, 1999 fixture or useable appliance. He stated his plans have made it possible for all units are accessible to people who are able to use a Class B handicap facilitY. Commissioner Puser inquired with regard to the parking lot design, and whether the applicant considered placement of the parking lot in the back of the building so the it would be closer to "the school" as opposed to closer to the front of the building. Mr. Axt replied the entrance access from Low Gap Road is "awkward" and installation of the parking lot in the back of the building would increase the amount of asphalt/paving which would be placed on the ground and reduce the property's landscaping because in order to get to the parking area, a person would have to go to the other side of the building. He also noted there is no access to the building from Bush Street. Ed Peugh, Ukiah, Property owner adjacent to the proposed building, stated he does not support the project wherein a three-story apartment building would be constructed which would essentially create the potential for increased people congestion in this area. He further stated he disagrees with the City Engineer's determination that traffic would not be a problem. He stated although the proposed three-story apartment building is zoned R-3 (High Density Residential) which is legal and conforming for the area, the issues of density, people and traffic congestion needs to be appropriately addressed. He noted the apartment building, with regard to its height, would not be compatible with the other structures within the building's perimeter. Commissioner Pruden questioned if the project were "scaled down" to a two-story apartment building, would this building reduction in scale and size be a probable project for the lot. Mr. Peugh replied there exists single family dwellings and duplexes near the proposed project. He also does not support construction of a "scaled down" two-story complex for the area because it would also be "too big and out of place" with the other neighboring structures. Bob Rinehart, 1975 Ridge Road, Ukiah, Applicant, stated he was assured by the City's Fire and Public Works Departments his proposed project does complies with the necessary standards and requirements for this R-3 High Density Residential area. He noted he has a written agreement from the Ukiah Unified School District allowing for pedestrian access and an exist-only easement from Bush Street. He alluded it is his intention to utilize this building as homes for older adults. He reported there is a storage of senior adult housing in the community. He stated his proposed project would benefit the adults living there wherein they would be in close proximity to "friends" living in the Jack Simpson Apartments and the convenience of living near the Downtown. He commented the building design would be accommodating to the needs of older people. Commissioner Pruden inquired whether applicant was "aware" the Jack Simpson Apartments, Autumn Leaves, Walnut Village, and other similar senior housing development are an "entitlement program" handled through Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC) and considered subsidized housing. Mr. Rinehart responded he was aware the above-referenced housing developments are considered subsidized housing and stated he is "checking" into different tenant financing alternatives. Ms. Pruden inquired "how" applicant plans to regulate and/or discriminate between ages since his project is not associated with an "entitlement program." MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 20 September 22, 1999 Mr. Rinehart replied before he commits to the different tenant financing possibilities, he is "_w,,aiting" for project approval by the Planning Commission. She clarified his objective is to placate to adult" housing. Ms. Pruden inquired "how" applicant plans to enforce the complex is for adult living only and not available to families with children. Mr. Rinehart responded he will "do whatever is necessary to make the regulations at the location fit the facility." Peter Dolan, 541 South School Street, Ukiah, stated he was the only one in attendance when the City considered "down zoning the corner" from R-3 to R-2. He further stated regarding a prior zoning hearing, "if there ever was a place that was appropriate for R-3 that would be the one, for just the same reasons a person can walk to school, work, and recreational facilities." He stated he compliments the architect for his effort and/or ability to design a complex wherein a proposed large number of people would be placed in a small amount of space and, at the same time, the project complies with all City standards and regulations. He reiterated he does not support the proposed project and the City of Ukiah does not need such a massive building which is "out of place" with the other structures abutting the complex. He noted the project will encourage potential "people and traffic congestion" and he stated there are many other alternative and creative projects which would more appropriately enhance this R-3 zoned area without the need of "cramming" people into a small amount of space. He stated he understands the project is intended for adult living but advised "there is no such thing as adult housing in California." He noted this complex would be an "unfortunate" place to raise a child as there would no appropriate children's play area. He stated the building would not benefit the people abutting the project or the future people who would be living in the complex. He further stated the project benefits a landlord who wants to "cram" the most amount of people in the smallest amount of space. He commented there exists a need for R-3 in this area, but the proposed project is "not creative" and the project offers no amenities to the neighborhood. Chairman Larson responded he hears people say there is a need for R-3 High Density zoned areas to be developed and when there exists such a project incorporating 30-units, this is exactly what the property is allotted in terms of zoning. Mr. Dolan stated "High Density does not necessarily mean cramming in as many people as a project would allow into a particular area." He noted in this R-3 zoned area, there are other structures and/or facilities which would better serve and compliment the neighborhood and community functions. The project does not have to be a 30-unit apartment building. He acknowledged the R-3 zoning does permit the existence of a 30-unit complex, but this fact does not necessarily provide adequate justification with regard to how the potential tenants will live and what amenities would such a project provide to the neighborhood. He formulated the concern is really a "quality of life" issues. Mr. Axt stated with regard to the parking lot and landscaping issues, his plans have separated the residential units as far away as possible from the existing structures and the use of dense landscaping vegetation provides for a greater distinction between the proposed complex and the other abutting residential properties. He noted the neighborhood consists of three real properties with small residential units on them. These residential homes are bounded by Bush Street and Low Gap Road and the adjacent properties to these small residential properties are much larger parcels MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 21 September 22, 1999 with potentially larger function capacities. He stated the subject property is zoned R-3 in a community which does requires high density residential units and he cannot recall a better place for High Density Residential than in the proposed location. He noted in the "world of development," this apartment building is not considered large" and the plans for a 30-unit complex "suits" the property. A general discussion followed regarding this legal and conforming project with regard to density to include people/traffic congestion and potential neighborhood change concerns. Mr. Dolan stated the parking lot plans are inadequate wherein there exists a 30-unit complex with no visitor parking. He further stated most tenants would own two cars whereupon the allotted parking spaces would accommodate just the tenants which satisfies the two cars per unit requirement. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED' 11:01 p.m. Planning Commission Discussion: Commission Puser stated the proposed building is large and she expressed her concerns with regard to potential people and traffic congestion. She further expressed safety concerns since the complex would be located very near Frank Zeek School. Commissioner Chiles stated he "likes" the building's design, which is attractive for adults to include interior corridors and other amenities. He further stated he has some height concerns with regard to the proposed building. Commissioner Pruden stated "if everything was allowable use, the Commissioners would be out of a job." She further stated it is the Commission's obligation to make decisions at a discretionary level wherein the proposed projects require judgment and interpretation as well as knowledge of what neighborhoods want and what the community needs. She reiterated last year when Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation presented a Self-Help housing project, a professional real estate broker stated there was no demand for high density apartments and such developments had "a high vacancy rate." She further reiterated "nothing has changed" in terms of population during the last year, but for the above-referenced reasons provided enough justification to allow the approval of 23 Self Help houses with substandard lots. She stated at the time when the Self-Help project was presented, Planning Staff and Commissioners "felt" a waiting list of 450 people to get into one of these homes was compelling. She commented California's Discriminatory Laws would not allow exclusion of families with children as tenants unless the housing project is specifically designed and the necessary requirements associated with such senior housing project fully satisfied. Ms. Pruden cited language from the Ukiah General Plan as follows: When older buildings are demolished and replaced by newer buildings, it is important to ensure that the fabric of the neighborhood is not visually overwhelmed by newer construction. Maintaining a neighborhood's residential character is important for long term stability. If the comfort or appearance of the neighborhood changes significantly, the existing residents may feel a loss and may wish to move from the area. She noted with regard to above-reference project, "we" are affecting the fabric of the neighborhood. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 22 September 22, 1999 5-5 Ms. Pruden cited additional language from the Ukiah General Plan, Design Review with reference to housing to include: To focus on siting standards to ensure adequate on-site open space for play areas or for passive recreation. The objective for design review is to strive for neighborhood compatibility rather than what style dictates. She explained from a Commissioners perspective, "whatever somebody wants is what they will tell the Commission is necessary to happen." She stated her concern referencing the project is the building's height. She further stated the Jack Simpson Apartments do not appear to be overwhelming as the proposed apartments. She indicated the 30-unit apartment will block the "view shed" to the west. She alluded a two-story apartment building would lessen the parking requirements as well as allow for more "open" space to create better landscaping buffers and provide some kind of amenities for the people who will live in the building. She advised the aforementioned High Density apartment building is "impactive", but utilization of the same design as applicable to a two-story apartment building would be more conducive to the neighborhood. She stated the proposed building is maximum use of the lot, which "may not be the proper thing" considering it is retrofitted into an existing neighborhood. It is "out of character to everything around it." Commissioner Correll stated he shares many of the concerns expressed by the other Commissioners with reference to this project. He noted the building's architecture is excellent. He stated his primary concern is the density particularly in relation to Low Gap Road and Bush Street. He further stated the Low Gap Road and Bush Street intersection is "out of control." She commented should this project be approved, traffic signals would be necessary. He stated he also disagrees with the City Engineers analysis, the 30-unit apartment project would not impact Low Gap Road and the Bush Street corner. She noted as much as he "likes" the project, it is "too dense." Mr. Larson stated the property is zoned 28 units per acre and the property must appropriately be viewed as such. He recommended the UUSD access easement be made as a project Condition of Approval as he would not support the project without the existence of a secondary access at least on an emergency basis. He drew attention to the fact the City zoned the area as R-3 High Density Residential with the vision this area would be developed as such. He stated with regard to his obligation as a Planning Commissioner, "it is difficult to be faced with the reality of what it takes to manifest this vision." He noted some of the realities in connection with such projects include the immediate need to house people and the fact there exists less residential land availability. He stated referencing density, "one difference in this particular property and it configuration brings up the issue of flag lots." He further stated "there is a large portion of this property which is devoted to access and/or parking/driveway accommodations." He commented "he does not feel this aspect can be justified as 'open space' or anything having to do with the appropriate density of the property." He formulated, theoretically, this aspect as referenced-above would reduce the building size by seven units and "this is the best he could do in terms of objection to the density." It was Staff's opinion the project cannot be modified by the Commissioners. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 23 September 22, 1999 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve Negative Declaration No. 99-28, as submitted by Timm AIIred, based on Findings Nos. 1-4, and outlined in the Staff's written report and discussed above. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner Chiles, Correll, Puser, and Chairman Larson Commissioner Pruden None None A motion was made by commissioner Chiles, seconded by Chairman Larson to recommend approval for Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28, as submitted by Timm AIIred, based on Findings Nos. 1-10 and Conditions of Approval Nos. 1-21, with modification to Condition of Approval No. 16 to include the following Commission discussion: Commissioner Correll stated he "feels more legally bound" by this project because of the existing zoning classification. Chairman I. arson alluded with regard to Mr. Correll's above-referenced statement, was "making the distinction between this being a use permit or discretionary action wherein the project is a site development permit, which is simply the way in which a legally allowed use is being proposed." Commissioner Pruden stated her concerns with regard to the following issues: . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Egress on to Low Gap Road; Increased traffic at the Low Gap Road and Bush Street intersection; View shed; Open Space; Passive Recreational Area; Building's height. She noted she has problems with the Site Development Permit, "per se." She stated although the zoning is legally conforming, she is not entirely satisfied with the project's presentation. She noted one of the problems with the project is "the density needs to be decreased in order to allow more open space." It was noted the proposed motion which includes a Commission discussion can be amended modified, or denied. ' Mr. Larson acknowledged withdrawal of his second in the above-referenced motion and inquired whether any of the Commissioners would second the motion. There was no second on the motion to recommend approval of Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28 and the motion was dropped. Mr. Larson stated the Commissioners have the opportunity to present specific and supportive Findings to deny the aforementioned project. It was noted Commissioner Pruden can second another motion wherein the Commission will vote on the project or, in the alternative, on a motion she would be required to present specific and MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 24 September 22, 1999 5-7 supportive Findings to deny the project. It was noted should the Commissioner make another motion to approve the project and if the project is subsequently denied after roll call, another motion must be made to disapprove the project wherein the Commission is required to take an action. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Chairman Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve to recommend approval for Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28, as submitted by Timm AIIred, based on Findings Nos. 1-10 and Conditions of Approval Nos. 1-21, with modification to Condition of Approval No. 16, as outlined in the Staff's written report and discussed above. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioner Chiles and Chairman Larson Commissioners Correll, Pruden, Puser None None ON A MOTION by Commissioner Prudent, seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve to deny Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28, as submitted by Timm AIIred, based on the following grounds the development of the apartment building would be detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare since the said project is not consistent with the Ukiah General Plan and goals to include: , . . . o . The structure is not designed to be compatible with the nearby residential and institutional buildings, which are single family dwellings; The apartment building, as Conditioned, would have a detrimental effect on the character of the nearby residential homes wherein the nearby homes are single-story structures consisting of a smaller scale and proportion than what is currently proposed by the aforementioned project; This project could not adequately be screened by height of trees due to its extreme height in the neighborhood wherein the apartment building's three-story height would exceed what trees are going to grow up so screening the building would not be possible by landscape means; The apartment building would or could possibly cut out light of the abutting parcel since the building is three stories due to shadowing during certain times of the year. The proposed landscaping does not have adequate open space or landscaping for the proposed density of the building; The apartment complex could or might possibly create hazardous or inconvenient impacts on the existing vehicular and pedestrian pattern in the neighborhood in an already busy intersection and traffic area; Ms. Pruden indicated, in her opinion, this project is not the "right one" for the area and stated a two- story apartment building would be more appropriate for the area. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 25 September 22, 1999 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Correll, Pruden, Puser Commissioner Chiles and Chairman Larson None None e 9A. 9B. 9C. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports Senior Planner Stump stated he had nothing to report due to the late hour. 10. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Pruden reported she is currently participating on a land use committee wherein the best land use can be determined and/or proposed for the Airport presented the Airport Commission for discussion. It was noted the Airport Commission is under the direction of the City Council. Ms. Pruden reported she did disliked the "tone" of correspondence received from Barry Dillard directed toward the work done by the Planning Commission. She stated, in her opinion, the Commissioners do a "superb" job with the projects as presented. She considered the letter to be "unsuitable." A brief discussion followed regarding the issue of building height. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Eric Larson, Chairman Catherine L. Elawadly, Recording Secretary 6:b:pc09/22/99.min MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 26 September 22, 1999 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA 8 D ITEM: DATE: ,, September 22, 1999 DATE: September 16, 1999 TO: City of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28 APPLICANT: Timm AIIred PROJECT SUMMARY: Approval of the Major Site Development Permit would allow the construction of a 30-unit apartment complex on a 1.04-acre parcel. The discretionary action associated with this project is quasi-judicial in nature; therefore, each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote approve, disapprove, or modify the project. LOCATION: The project site is located at 509 Low Gap Road (Assessor Parcel # 001-430-29 & 30), on the north side of Low Gap, approximately 200 feet west of its intersection with North Bush Street. (Please note the current address is inconsistent with addresses on abutting lots in that it ends with an uneven number, and that the main area of the site is located at the end of a narrower driveway located between two wider lots. Planning staff intends to initiate an address change for this lot to make it more consistent with the address range on the abutting parcels.) DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28. The Planning Department further recommends APPROVAL of Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28 on the grounds the proposed apartment building would be consistent with the goals and policies of the High Density Residential land use classification of the Ukiah General Plan and the use and development standards for the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Ukiah's Environmental Coordinator determined this project was not exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an Initial Study was prepared by Planning Department staff. Staff determined in this study that the development of the apartment complex could cause significant potential adverse impacts to soil and water resources in the area, and mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels are included in the Initial Study and as recommended Conditions of Approval for the project report. Accordingly, staff is recommending the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: HDR (High Density Residential) ZONING DISTRICT: R-3 (High Density Residential) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The approval of the Major Site Development Permit would allow the construction of a three-story, 30-unit apartment complex on a 1.04-acre parcel located in the R-3 Zoning District. This lot is irregular-shaped, with the widest area (146 feet by 240 feet) located north of a narrower portion that is between 40-57 feet wide and approximately 185 feet long. The narrower area is developed with a paved driveway that provides ingress and egress to two single- family residential structures located on the property to the east; and the wider portion is developed with a duplex, a two-stall carport and a small accessory shed. The project site has a three percent (3%) grade that extends from the north to the south, and contains limited vegetation. On November 2, 1996, the City Engineer approved a Parcel Map (D65 P68; reference MS 96-26) that divided the site into two parcels of record. The property line between these parcels extends north from the western boundary of the narrower portion ~f the eastern lot, effectively cutting the property in half. This property line would run through the proposed apartment building, and the applicants would be required to eliminate or adjust the property line in the event this application is approved. The proposed apartment building would be located on the northern portion of the site, 10-15 feet from the northern property line and at least 10 feet from the eastern and western property lines. Building walls would be approximately 27 feet high, but the overall building height would be increased to 35 feet due to the pitched roof that covers the structure. The vertical wall mass on the northern and southern elevations would be staggered due to the varied width of the building, and by the inclusion of covered balconies with gabled roofs that would extend at least five feet out from abutting walls. Covered stairwells would also be included to reduce the continuous mass of these walls. The mass of the eastern and western elevations would be broken up by the construction of two-foot wide by ten-foot wide projections covered by a gable roof. These walls would be constructed with wood framing covered by light blue, yellow, and gray vinyl siding, and wood trim painted gray. The roofs on the building would be staggered in height, with multiple gables over the balconies and room extensions described above. These roofs would all be covered with earth tone colored sculpted composition shingles. The areas surrounding the apartment building would be developed with landscaping, pedestrian walkways, and lighting standards, and the area to the south would be paved for a 48-stall parking lot. A 3,200 square foot recreation area would be developed south of the parking lot. Ingress and egress to the project site would be through a 20-24 foot wide access driveway over the narrower portion of the site. This driveway would extend approximately 185 feet from the property's frontage along Low Gap Road to the parking area described above. A five-foot wide sidewalk and eight additional parking stalls would be constructed on the west side of this access driveway. All six of the existing trees on the site would be removed to accommodate building pads or parking areas, but the landscape plan shows these trees would be replaced with landscape planters containing groundcover, shrubs, and at least 38 trees. Proposed trees include 11 Bay Laurel, 11 Red Oak, 10 Albizzia, and 6 Purple Red Locust trees. The applicants are also negotiating with the Ukiah Unified School District to obtain an easement that would allow the development of a pedestrian access and an exit-only driveway across the property to the east. These easements would be beneficial to pedestrians by allowing them to access points to the north without walking to the public right-of-way along Low Gap Road, and would provide an alternative egress for vehicle drivers that wish to avoid the Low Gap Road/Bush Street intersection. Unfortunately, no formal access agreement has been completed and neither access can be incorporated into the project design. STAFF ANALYSIS: Planning staff completed an environmental analysis, a review of project consistency with General Plan and zoning requirements, and a design review of the building itself. The different components of this analysis are discussed below. I Environmental Analysis: Planning staff completed an Initial Study (attached) for the project in which it was determined the project could cause significant potential adverse impacts to site soils, surface water distribution, and noise levels. Staff also identified mitigation measures that would reduce these impacts to levels that are not significant, and included these measures as recommended Conditions of Approval. Based on this analysis, staff also prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. General Plan Consistency: The project site is designated for High Density Residential uses on the General Plan Land Use Map, and the proposed apartment complex would be consistent with Land Use Element goals and policies for HDR sites. It is also consistent with Housing Element goals that encourage maximum development of high-density residential sites. Consistency with HDR Zonin~l District Standards: Staff also determined the proposed structure is consistent with the use and development standards for the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District, including specific requirements for maximum building height, yard widths, and special distances between buildings. The project also complies with the R-3 zoning requirement for 1,500 square feet of site area for each unit since the subject property is approximately 45,000 square feet in area. The project is also consistent with the parking standards for the R-3 zone since the parking lot design complies with multiple-unit residential requirements of one parking stall for one-bedroom units, two parking stalls for units with more than one bedroom, and one handicap parking stall for every 40 stalls. Based on the project design of 6 one-bedroom apartments and 24 two- bedroom apartments, staff determined the apartment complex would require a minimum of 54 parking stalls, including two handicap-accessible units. Landscaping: Planning staff reviewed the proposed landscape plan and determined the proposed vegetation would be proportional to building elevations and would cover at least twenty percent (20%) of the total area of the project site, including a live planting ratio of at least fifty percent (50%) of the landscape area. This plan would also utilize trees that have adapted to the Ukiah area, including deciduous tree species on the southern and eastern boundaries. Staff also noted the parking areas are bounded by landscape planters with one tree for every four parking stalls, and can be accessed by multiple sidewalks and a striped crosswalk that would connect the apartment complex with the Low Gap Road frontage. In fact, it is staff's opinion the proposed location of the trees would provide an effective shade cover for paved areas since there is a high concentration of trees on the eastern, western, and southern boundaries. The landscape plan also includes a lighting plan that shows three lighting standards in the parking area and seven lighting standards on the south side of the apartment building. The applicants have not chosen the design of these standards, but indicated they would be compatible with the residential design of the building. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed location of these standards would not cause glare o,t- lighting on abutting lots, but staff recommends that the design and placement of the lighting standards be included as part of the Final Landscape Plan recommended in Condition 15. Building Design: The proposed apartment complex appears to be a massive structure when compared to structures located on abutting lots, and this building would be the only three-stow structure in the area. In an effort to reduce the negative visual impacts, the applicants included the design features described earlier in the Project Description section of this report in an effort to reduce the vertical mass of the walls and avoid a box-like appearance. Staff also notes that the building would be set back 30-200 feet from main travel corridors and screened by extensive landscaping. Based on these factors, it is the opinion of Planning Department staff that these features are successful in reducing the massive appearance of the structure and in presenting an attractive and interesting appearance, and that the proposed building design is consistent with R-3 design guidelines and compatible with the residential and institutional buildings that surround it. CONCLUSIONS: Planning Department staff concludes the proposed apartment complex would be consistent with the Ukiah General Plan goals and policies for the HDR land use classification, including policies in the Housing Element that encourage the maximum development of high density lots. The project would also comply with the applicable use and development standards for the HDR Zoning District, and is consistent with all applicable design standards and the appearance of other buildings on the site or abutting lots. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for the approval of Major Site Development Permit #99-28 is based, in part, on the following findings: 1, The apartment building, as conditioned, would be consistent with the General Plan goals and policies for the HDR (High Density Residential) land use classification, including Housing Element policies for encouraging maximum development of high density residential properties; 2. The apartment building, as conditioned, would comply with applicable use and development standards for the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District; . The apartment complex would not create hazardous or inconvenient impacts to existing vehicular or pedestrian patterns since the anticipated increase in levels of average daily traffic from the site would not be substantial enough to cause service levels for abutting public streets or intersections to decline; o The proposed driveway and parking lot would not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses since the City Engineer determined the proposed driveway access would be adequate to provide safe and efficient ingress and egress when developed to City of Ukiah standards; 5. The proposed landscaping plan has adequate planting areas and vegetation to provide sufficient open space, shade, and screening of buildings; . The apartment building would not restrict or cut out light or air on abutting parcels since the three-story building is set back far enough from the northern, eastern, and western property lines that large amounts of shade would not be cast on abutting lots; 7. The apartment building would not excessively damage or destroy natural features since none are present on the site; o The apartment building, as conditioned, would not have a detrimental effect on the character of nearby residential homes since the building has an aesthetically pleasing design and would be screened by extensive landscaping and buildings; . The apartment building, as conditioned, would generate no significant adverse environmental impacts, as determined in the Initial Study prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and 10. The development of the apartment building, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare since it is consistent with applicable General Plan goals and policies and the use requirements, development standards, and design guidelines for the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. Furthermore, the structure is designed to be compatible with nearby residential and institutional buildings and would be heavily screened by existing buildings, landscaping, or solid fencing. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Major Site Development Permit #99-28, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the Planning Commission, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. . Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Planning Commission. o In addition to any particular condition, which might be imposed, any construction 'shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. 4. Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. . . . , o 10. Building Permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Site Development Permit, or it shall be subject to the City's permit revocation process and procedures. In the event the Building Permit cannot be issued within the stipulated period from the project approval date, a one year extension may be granted by the Director of Planning if no new circumstances affect the project which otherwise would render the original approval inappropriate or illegal. It is the ap, plicant's responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to the Planning Dei~artment prior to the two-year expiration date. The approved Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the Site Development Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty four (24) consecutive months. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Site Development Permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the Site Development Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. Improvement Plans for curb, gutters, sidewalks, driveways and street paving along Low Gap Road shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer in accordance with City Standard Drawing Nos. 101 and 102. All improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the approved improvement plans under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Encroachment Permit shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project with a fee equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the improvements. All improvements shall be done by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License who shall submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. 11. The City Engineer shall permit no site preparation or grading activities on the project site without the review and approval of a Grading and Drainage Plan. This Plan shall include the following: a) The extent of modifications to existing drainage patterns; b) The extent of storm drainage improvements and erosion control measures for building pads, driveways, parking lot areas, and other movements of soil; c) The extent of other development the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or on abutting properties or could cause wind or water erosion. 12. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion; drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on-site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. 13. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" (inches) of asphalt concrete with a 6" (inch) aggregate base, or, alternatively, any option approved by the City Engineer 14. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Public Utilities and Public Works Departments. 15. A Landscaping and Lighting Plan shall be submitted by the project applicant and approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building. This plan shall include, but not be limited to the following: a) A planting legend that includes the names, location, coverage area, and canopy cover of proposed vegetation; b) A planting schedule for all vegetation installed on the site; c) A maintenance schedule for existing or proposed vegetation, including a watering schedule and irrigation system design; and d) A lighting plan for any proposed exterior lighting installed or otherwise used on the site, including the design of the light standards used. 16. Landscaping on the project site shall include at least four deciduous trees that are either native to the Ukiah area or adapted to its climate, and shall be 15 gallons or more in size. 17. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat, weed-free manner, and may not be removed or substantially altered unless the Director of Planning reviews and approves the removal or replacement of vegetation determined to be diseased, unstable, hazardous, or poorly located on the site. Any vegetation removed from the site shall be replaced with similar vegetation approved by the Planning Director. 18. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and/or ventilation equipment shall be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building upon which it is located. 19. Outdoor refuse/recycle containers shall be aesthetically screened from view; garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosures. 20. Hours of construction shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless additional hours of construction for special construction activities or projects are reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 21. All conditions that do not contain a specific date or time period for completion shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Plot Plan (Reduced-not to scale) 3. Floor Plan (Typical) 4. West Elevation & South (Front) Elevation Study Section 5. Negative Declaration/Initial Study for SDP #99-28 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The following personnel prepared and revi(~wed this Planning Report, respectively: Dave Lohse, Asso~,~a. /'// ~ (~~Y~tump, S~n~anner Bob Saw;er, Planr~in~/Director'' SDP99-38/FINE.PC.9.22.99 LOCATION MAP MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 99-28:ALLRED 509 Low Gap Road (Assessor Parcel Nos. 001-430-17) )URSE 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Feet SCALE- 1 inch: 500 feet Q E LECTRIC & GAS METER~ " MAILBOXES/DIRECTORY -.~ (E) 10' SE'W~R EASEMENT ' .'O (E).lO' P.U; ~EMENT "~ .- ~1~ ' LI~HTIH~ ~NTINGS .. .-. LI~flT PURPLE ROBE LOCUST o A LBI~IA '. ~:.'' tRAIN VINES ON AOULT '"J SCIIOOL & CEMETERY - .' ' FENCES .. G-lo TTPIF_.AL F~L._~??,iT_ 'PLANS 6-Il EXTERIOR MATERIALS ' 'ROOF: SCULPTURED COMPO SHINGLES · TRIM: PAINTED WOOD : SIOING: HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING ON PLYWOOD SHEATHING · WINDOWS: CLEAR GLASS IN WHITE VINYL NAIL-ON FRAMES : I {r72 ' _'Z '1 ! .... -_-'--':-'-~-. ~- 1 .... f .... 1 ' !, i l--i I ' - ,~, - I I ' : II......... :,, ,, ..:-_.::?.!:__ L: I ,ill 11 l r--q U-~-~ ~~'.':~ ~I - I F~ CITY OF UKIAH NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE: APPLICANTS: PROJECT NO.: LOCATION: August 31, 1999 AIIred Construction Major Site Development Permit No. 99-28 509 Low Gap Road, City of Ukiah and County of Mendocino (Assessor Parcel Numbers 001-430-17) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: Approval of the proposed Major Site Development Permit would allow the construction of a three-story, 30-unit apartment complex on a 1.04-acre parcel located in the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. A paved access driveway, parking lot, and 3,000 square feet of recreational area would also be developed. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Potential significant adverse impacts identified in this initial study include the following: , 1. Impacts to soils from trenching, compaction and grading; 2. Impacts to water resources from trenching, compaction, and grading; and 3. Short-term noise level increases caused by construction activities. FINDINGS SUPPORTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION' . . Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment; Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals; . Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and 4. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in environmental impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. STATEMENT OF DECLARATION- After appraisal of the possible impacts of this project, the City of Ukiah has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and further, that this Negative Declaration constitutes compliance with the requirements for environmental review and analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. This document may be reviewed/at the City of Ukiah Planning Department, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 .~7~,/Aven U~~a' ~S~ Sera,y/Environmental Coordinator ! City of Ukiah INITIAL STUDY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Project Proponent: / AIIred Construction 2. Address of Proponent: P.O. Box 450, Ukiah, CA 95482 3. Name of Project: Major Site Development Permit #99-28 4. Site Location: 5. Date of Initial Study Preparation: 509 Low Gap Road, Ukiah, CA 95482 (Assessor Parcel No. 001-430-17) August 31,1999 6. Name of Lead Agency: City of Ukiah Planning Department 7. Phone Number of Lead Agency: 707/463-6200 8. Address of Lead Agency: 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah CA 95482 9. Project Description: The approval of the proposed Major Site Development Permit would allow the construction of a three-story apartment building with thirty units on a 1.04 acre parcel located in the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. 10. Environmental Setting: The project site is irregular-shaped, with a wider area (146 feet by 240 feet) located to the north of the narrower portion, which is between 40-57 feet wide and 200 feet long. The narrower area is developed with a paved driveway that provides ingress and egress to two single-family residential structures located on the property to the east; the wider portion is developed with a duplex, a two-stall carport and a small accessory shed. Topography on the site is relatively fiat, with a three percent (3%) grade that extends from the north portion of the site to the south. Vegetation is limited to five non-native trees, lawn areas and small shrubs. 10. Person(s) Responsible for Preparing Initial Study: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner LOCATION MAP MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT No. 99-28:ALLRED 509 Low Gap Road (Assessor Parcel Nos. 001-430-17) V1N~¥OOD PARK NICIPAL )URSE 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Feet SCALE: I inch = 500 feet i a. WILL THE PROJECT RESULT IN THE FOLLOWING' ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 1. EARTH / SOILS: Unstable eadh conditions or changes in geologic structures. Disruptions, Displacements, Compaction, or overcovering of soil. Change in topography or ground surface relief features. d. The destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion ol~ soils, either on or off the site. f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion that may modify the channel of a river, stream, inlet, or bay? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes. No Not Significant Significant Unless Mitigated Significant No Apparent Mitigation Cumulative Impacts WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 2. WATER: a. Changes in the currents, or the~ [~ [~ [~ [~ course of water movements, in either ~ fresh or marine waters. b. Changes in the absorption rates, j'. drainage patterns, or the rate and [~ [~[~ [~ [~ amount of surface runoff. c. Alterations ,o the course or flow of ~ ~/ [~ [~ [~ flood waters or ground waters. d. Change in the amount of surface [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ water in any water body or any discharge into surface water. e. Any degradation or alteration of [~ [~ ~ [~ [~ surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity. f. Alteration of the direction or rate of ~ ~ [~ [~ ~ flow of ground water. g. Change in the quantity of ground '~ or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or . excavations. h. Change in the quality of ground [~ ~ ~ [~ ~ water. ~ '. Substantial reduction in the amount of [~ ~ ~ ~ water otherwise available for public water supplies. ,. Exposure of people or property to ~ [~ ~ [~ [~ water related hazards such as flooding or tsunamis. WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 3. PLANT LIFE: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants. b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of plants. I · c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species. d. Reduction in acreage of any ~" agricultural crop. 4. ANIMAL LIFE: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals including birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, insects, and bethnic organisms. b. Reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals. c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals' d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat. WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 5. NOISE: a. Increase in existing noise levels. [~ ~/ [~ [~ [~ b. Exposure of people to severe noise ~/ ve,s. ! · 6. LIGHT AND GLARE: a. Production of new light and glare. [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ b. Reduction of solar exposure or ~ adverse impacts to existing solar [~~ [~ [~ ~ collection facilities. 7. LAND USE: a. Substantial alteration of the present [~ ~ [~ or planned land use of a given area. ~ ~ 8. NATU~L RESOURCES: WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 9. RISK OF UPSET: a. Adsk of an explosion orthe release ~ [~ [~ of hazardous substances, (including [~ [~ oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions. b. Possible interference with an ~,/ emergency response plan or ~~ [~ [~ [~ evacuation plan. · 10. POPULATION: density, or growth rate of human populations. 11. HOUSING: a. Will the proposal effect existing ~ r--i= housing or create a demand for new housing? WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 12. TRANSPORTATION: a. vehicularGenerati°nmovement?°f substantial additional[~ ~ [~ [~ [~ b. Effects on existing parking facilities, [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ or demand for new parking facilities? c, Substantial impact upon existing [~ ~ /[~ [~ [~ transportation systems? · d. Alterations to present patterns of ~ and/or §oods? vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? g. De§radation of the level of service'~ ~ [~ ~ (kOS) of any intersection to an ~ ~ unac~ptable level? 13. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. ~11 the proposal have an effe~ upon, or resuE in a ne~ for new or alter~ govern~nt se~i~s in any of the following areas: 1. Fire prote~ion? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2. Poli~ prote~ion? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4. Pa~s&recreation facil~ies? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5. Maintenan~ of public facilities? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigated Apparent Mitigation 14. ENERGY: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon~ [~ [~ [~ [~ existing sources of energy, or require ~11 the development of new energy sources? I 15. UTILITIES: a. Will the project result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following: 3. Transmission lines? [~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 16. HUMAN HEALTH: a. Creation of any health hazard or ~ ~ ~ [~ [~ potential health hazard? b. Exposure of people to any existing // health hazards? [~~ ~ ~ WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS' Mitigation 17. AESTHETICS: a. Obstruction of any scenic vista or~ [~ [~ [~ [~ view open to the public, or create an ~1~ aesthetically offensive site open to public view? / · 18. RECREATION: a. Impact upon the quality or quantity of [~ ~ [~ [~ [~ existing recreational opportunities? 19. CULTURAL RESOURCES: prehistoric or historic archaeological site? to a prehistoric or historic building or structure? c. Cause a physical change that would ~ [~ [~ ~ ~ effe~ the unique ethnic cuEural values? 20. AIR: a. ~o,~,o. o, ~.~ ~,~,e o~ ~e~er~, ~,~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ qual~ standard. c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, climate, either locally or regionally? DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND SUGGESTED MITIGATION MEASURES 1. EARTH/SOILS: The Ukiah Valley is part of an active seismic region that contains the Maacama Fault, which traverses the valley to the east and north of the City. According to resource materials maintained by the Ukiah Planning Department, the projected maximum credible earthquake along this fault would be approximately 7.4 magnitude on the Richter scale. Site topography is relatively fiat, with a slight grade deqline of approximately three- percent (3%) running from the northern half of the site to the south. According to information compiled by the U.S. Department of Conservation, the project site is underlain by a variety of "urban" soil types, which consist of naturally occurring soils that have been mixed with fill deposits. The site contains no unique geologic or physical features, or known areas of instable soils that would be affected by development of the proposed apartment complex. a. Impacts: Soils on the project site have been substantially altered by the introduction of dirt and other fill materials over many years, and there are no definable soil types or formations that are expected to cause adverse impacts or be irreversibly affected by the proposed project. Portions of the project site have also been paved to provide access to the existing residential structure and accessory buildings, but the total coverage of site soils is approximately 4,000 square feet or less than one percent (1%) of the 1.04 acre site. Approximately eighty percent (80%) of this site area would require grading and coverage for building foundations, access roads, and parking lots. However, these activities would not cause unstable earth conditions or effect any unique geologic features or structures since these conditions are not present on the site. The soil modification activities would cause substantial changes to site topography, primarily through grading that would alter site contours and drainage patterns, and the compaction and overcovering of site soils. These activities could also cause increased levels of wind and water erosion if disturbed soils are left uncovered for long periods of time. While it is doubtful that these impacts would be substantial due to the relatively gentle topography on the site, they could become significant if standard grading, paving and soil suppression measures typically used during construction are not implemented. Therefore, the City Engineer will require that a Grading and Drainage Plan for the site be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to site preparation and grading activities. The City Engineer also requires that all earth modification activities be routinely inspected during construction of the apartment complex to ensure compliance with the provisions of the plan. The required components of this plan are outlined below in recommended Mitigation Measure #1. 14 b. Mitigation: The following measure shall be required to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with grading and paving activities required to develop the project site: . The City Engineer shall permit no site preparation or grading activities on the project site without the review and approval of a Grading and Drainage Plan. This Plan shall include the following: a. co the extent of modifications to existing drainage patterns; the extent of storm drainage improvements and erosion control measures for building pads, driveways, parking lot areas and other movements of soils; the extent of other development that the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or abutting properties or cause wind or water erosion. ' · 2. WATER: The project site is not located near any streams, tributaries or other body of water. The majority of the site has also been graded and covered over with buildings, asphalt and concrete paving, with drainage running to storm drains along Low Gap Road. a. Impacts: The construction of the proposed apartment building and paving for parking areas and access roads would require grading and overcovering over extensive areas. It is anticipated these activities would cause substantial reductions in the rate of water absorption and a resultant increase in surface runoff that could cause significant adverse impacts on and off the site if standard grading and paving techniques are not utilized and existing drainage patterns are altered. Therefore, the City Engineer will require that changes in drainage patterns and its affects on the safe removal of storm waters from the site are shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan discussed above. Staff does not anticipate any substantial impacts to water movements in area creeks or tributaries since the site does not contribute substantial amounts of water directly into any creek or other surface waters. Furthermore, no decline in the amounts of water flowing to local streams or the Russian River is expected since runoff from the site would be routed to these sources through storm drains located along Low Gap Road and Bush Street. A substantial reduction in water absorption rates and ground water quantities at the site should occur due to the extensive amount of soils being covered by building foundations and paving. Staff does not, however, anticipate the reduction in water absorption to significantly affect ground water supplies or quality since the water table beneath the site is relatively close to the surface and regularly replenished by groundwater draining from the west. For the same reasons, Planning staff does not anticipate any substantial changes to groundwater movements. Therefore no groundwater mitigation measures are recommended. 15 b. The development of thirty apartment units will substantially increase the amounts of water required for human consumption and irrigation of the proposed landscaping on the site. However, staff of the City Water and Sewer Department reviewed this project and noted the site could be served with water without causing substantial impacts to area water supplies or any reductions in water services to other parcels. ,Mitigation: See the surface drainage measures included in Mitigation Measure #1 under the EARTH/SOILS discussion above. 3. PLANT LIFE: Vegetation on the site consists of five mature trees, but resources maintained by the Planning Department reveal no known plant species that are included in Federal or State listings as rare, threatened or endangered. a..Impacts: The development of the proposed ap,artment complex and paved areas would require the removal of the six existing trees and most of the other vegetation on the site. However, none of the existing plants are included in Federal or State listings as rare, threatened, or endangered, and none are considered to be unique to the Ukiah area. The existing vegetation would be replaced with extensive plantings, including 38 trees. These landscape modifications are substantial changes to the numbers and diversity of plant species on the site, but are not considered to be adverse impacts since none of the existing plants are unique, rare, or endangered species. New plant species would be introduced to the project site, but all of the trees proposed have been used on other parcels in the Ukiah area and are not expected to cause adverse impacts to the normal replenishment of existing vegetation in the area. The proposed landscape plan does not include any native plants and could limit opportunities for their natural propagation or reintroduction due to the extensive plantings planned throughout the site. However, Planning staff does not consider this to be a significant adverse impact since the project site is located in an area zoned for high density residential land uses and has been maintained in a manner that has not encouraged the natural occurrence of native vegetation. Therefore, while Planning staff encourages the applicant to include native plants in the final landscape plan for the site, it does not recommend that measures for the reintroduction of native plants on the project site be required to mitigate this insignificant environmental impact. b. Mitigation: None recommended. 4. ANIMAL LIFE: The project site, which is currently developed with a single duplex and six mature trees, is located in an urban area zoned for high-density residential land uses. According to the Natural Diversity Data Base prepared by the California Department of Fish and Game there are no known rare, threatened, or endangered animals that use the subject property for habitat or migration. a. !rnpacts: The project site is relatively undeveloped for its size, but it contains no known rare, threatened, or endangered animal population. It is also surrounded by other institutional and residential uses that limit its use for habitat or migration by animal life. Therefore, Planning Department staff recommends no animal life mitigation measures be required for this project. b. Mitigation:. None recommended. 5. NOISE: The proposed apartment complex would cause increased ambient and incidental noises due to the increase in persons living at the site and the increased maintenance activities (i.e. lawn care) typically associated with higher density housing. a. ~lmpacts: Ambient and incidental noise levels at the site should rise substantially with the development of the 30-unit apartment complex and the increased human densities it will allow. However, there is no evidence these noise level increases would expose persons to severe or harmful noise levels, regularly exceed the residential noise standards of the Ukiah Zoning Code, or otherwise expose persons to significant adverse long-term impacts. Furthermore, staff anticipates the location of the building would reduce potential noise levels since it places noise sources as far as possible from residences on abutting parcels. bi , Adverse short-term noise increases could be caused by construction of the apartment building, but staff anticipates this impact would not be significant if construction activities are limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday. Although these noise impacts would be short-lived, they would be potentially significant if hours of construction are not limited to those with the lowest impact potential, and staff recommends the measure listed below be required. Mitigation: The following measure shall be required to mitigate short-term adverse noise impacts during the construction phase of the project: Hours of construction shall be limited to those hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on Mondays through Saturdays, unless additional hours of construction for special construction activities or projects are reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning. 5. LIGHT AND GLARE: The development of the multi-story apartment building will cause additional sources of light and glare from apartment windows and lighting, security lighting, and parking lot lighting. 17 a. Impacts: Light and glare would be substantially increased over existing levels at the site due to the large number of windows the proposed three-story apartment building would have and the need for security lighting in building landings and parking lot areas. However, Planning staff does not anticipate these impacts would be significant since the building would be set back approximately 20 feet from the nearest abutting property line and security lighting in stairwells and other common areas would be roofed. Outdoor lighting in parking lot and recreational areas could be located close enough to abutting properties that it would cause nuisance impacts. However, the Ukiah Zoning Code requires all lighting in parking lots to be contained on-site by the use of hedges and fences, which are included in the design of this project. Therefore, Planning staff does not recommend that mitigation measures for outdoor lighting be required. · b. Mitigation: None recommended. 7. LAND USE: The project site is designated for HDR (High Density Residential) uses on the General Plan land use map, and is located in the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District. The site is currently developed with a single duplex. a. Impacts: The project site is currently developed with a single duplex unit, which is a much lower unit density than that permitted by the Ukiah General Plan. The development of 30 apartment units on the 1.04 acre site would be a substantial increase over the existing unit numbers, but it is consistent with the land use density of 28 residential units per acre for the HDR land use classification. The construction of the apartment units would require the adjustment of the boundary line that extends between the two parcels comprising the site since the proposed building would be transacted by this line, and the approval of the adjustment will be required as condition of approval for this project. However, the existence of the boundary line does not cause any environmental impacts requiring mitigation. b. Mitigation' None required. 8. NATURAL RESOURCES: The construction of the proposed apartment building would require the use of common natural resources, including earthen materials and other natural materials or alloys. a. Impacts: The proposed development of the apartment building would require the use of metals and other natural building materials, and the use of earthen materials for paving the access roadway and parking areas. However, there is nothing in the project design that indicates that such materials would be used in amounts that would cause significant increases in the rate that these materials would be used. b. Mitigation: None required. 9. RISK OF UPSET: The construction of the proposed apartment building would not require storage or use of large amounts of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) or major changes to emergency response or evacuation plans. a. Impacts: The proposed apartment building would increase the amounts of hazardous substances on the site since the property manager and individual tenants would use motor oils, pesticides and insecticides, and other household products that could cause limited contamination of the area if not used, stored, and disposed of in the proper manner. However, there is no evidence the regular use of these products would cause adverse environmental impacts, particularly since their use would done in an incremental fashion that would not allow concentrations of these materials. The development of the proposed thirty-unit structure would substantially increase the number of persons using the site and the Ukiah Fire Marshal indicated the multiple-unit structure would require the installation of fire prevention and suppression measures during construction to ensure its occupants are safe from fire and other hazards. In addition to the building sprinklers and fire lanes required in the Uniform Fire Code, the Fire Marshal also recommends that a secondary access lane be developed and maintained with a Knox box to allow persons another evacuation route in the event of a fire or other disaster. Based on this suggestion, the applicants are working to obtain an easement for a secondary access route to Bush Street, but an easement to cross the abutting property on the eastern boundary had not been secured at the date of publication for this analysis. Staff notes, however, that while this access would be preferred, the Fire Marshal would not require it as part of an emergency response/evacuation plan for the site or surrounding areas and it is not, therefore, required as a formal mitigation measure. b. Mitigation: None required. 10. POPULATION: The current population for the City of Ukiah is approximately 15,000 persons, with a projected annual growth rate that is less than two percent (2.0%) per year. a. Impacts: The 1.04 acre project site is designated in the General Plan and on zoning maps for High Density Residential land uses, which would allow the development of the proposed 30-unit complex. In fact, this number of units is consistent with General Plan goals and policies for the maximum development of high-density residential lands. The development of these units would increase housing opportunities in the Ukiah area, but it is not anticipated the local population would increase substantially since local residents seeking better housing are expected to occupy many of the apartments. This opinion is based on the need for additional housing units identified in the Housing Element of the General Plan and the relatively high occupancy rates and monthly rents for similarly sized apartment units. Therefore, the increase in apartment units would not be an adverse effect on area populations and does not require mitigation. b. Mitigation: None required. 19 11. HOUSING: The project site is designated for high density residential land uses on the City of Ukiah General Plan Land Use Map and on the City Zoning Map, and the 30 units proposed on the site are consistent with the high density capacity of 28 units per acre. a. Impacts: The high-density residential land use and zoning classification are assigned to lands intended for maximum development of apartment buildings and other higher density residential uses, and the residential density proposed in this project is consistent with the maximum density rates established by the Ukiah General Plan. The proposed development is also consistent with most siting standards for the R-3 Zoning District. Based on this consistency, staff determined that the project should have no adverse affects on existing housing stocks and would not create demands for additional housing. b..Mitigation: None required. , · 12. TRANSPORTATION: The proposed apartment development would be located on the wider portion of the site, which is connected to Low Gap Road by a 40-57 foot wide section that fronts this public street. This narrow section of land would be developed with a 20-foot wide access driveway that would provide the primary point of ingress and egress for the occupants of the proposed apartment building, which would be located on the wider portion of land. Applicants also intend to develop a secondary access roadway for emergency access and egress-only traffic between the eastern portion of the site and Bush Street, but this roadway would require the securement of an easement from the owner of the abutting property. Planning staff used standard traffic studies listed in Trip Generation, 6~h Edition (Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1998) to calculate that the 30-unit Complex would cause traffic volumes in the area to increase by approximately 192 vehicle trip ends (vte) per day. Peak hour trips would increase by approximately 20 vehicle trip during peak morning and afternoon hours. Traffic counts prepared in 1992 show the average daily traffic volume (ADT) along Low Gap Road is approximately 5,100 vehicles, with approximately 650 trips during both peak morning and aftemoon travel hours. The City Engineer indicated these traffic counts are still valid since they include traffic from the County Administration Center and no other major developments have been constructed since this center was occupied. a. ,Impacts: According to the City Engineer, the projected level of traffic caused by the construction and use of the proposed apartment building is not substantial enough to cause significant declines in levels of service (LOS) for Low Gap Road or the Low Gap Road/Bush Street intersection. This determination is based on the relatively minor traffic volume increase for this street and intersection, which currently operate at LOS B, as defined in the Ukiah General Plan. 20 Traffic caused by the proposed apartment complex would cause adverse impacts to existing transportation systems and the present patterns of circulation and movements of people in the area, and could increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. However, these effects would be caused by the proximity of the entrance to the complex since it would be only 75 feet from the Low Gap Road/Bush Street intersection, and not by the increase in traffic volumes. This distance is adequate for safe ingress and egress at the site throughout most of the day, but staff anticipates access to the eastbound lane of Low Gap Road could be blocked dudng high-traffic periods when students and employees leave the Ukiah High School campus to the west. Traffic tends to queue in front of the project site during these periods, which typically occur during the lunch hour and mid-aftemoon, and would require persons wishing to travel east from the project site to wait or to turn west and use an altemate route. The City Engineer does not, however, view this impact as a significant traffic impact since its primary effects w(~uld be on persons that reside in the proposed apartments and would not cause significant delays or increased hazards for persons driving on Low Gap Road. It is also the opinion of staff that these nuisance- type impacts will be largely mitigated by residents adjusting to peak travel times for the Low Gap Road right-of-way by limiting travel trips during these times to those considered to be absolutely necessary. A proposed secondary roadway to provide is egress-only/emergency access is proposed for the eastern portion of the site, but the development of this route is dependent on the securement and maintenance of an easement from the owner'of the abutting property. City staff prefers the development of this access, but staff does not consider it necessary for resident or emergency access, and do not recommend its inclusion as a mitigation measure for traffic impacts. b. Mitigation- None required. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES: The City of Ukiah provides a wide army of public services to the site, including public safety and electrical, water and sewer services. The City also maintains the Low Gap Road frontage that abuts the site, and provides recreational facilities near the property. The Ukiah Unified School District would provide educational services for children of school age living in the proposed units. a. Impacts: Planning staff contacted various agencies that would provide public services to the site and noted that none of these agencies anticipated any substantial impacts to existing services or the need for substantial new services. Individual analyses are outlined below: . The Ukiah Fire Marshal noted that the proposed apartment building would have to comply with a number of Fire Code mandates, including building sprinklers and fire access lane requirements. However, the Fire Department staff also indicated the apartment development would have no substantial adverse impacts on fire protection services and would not require hiring additional emergency personnel. 21 . . . . o City Police Department staff also reviewed the proposed apartment building' and indicated no substantial effects to police services would be caused by the development of the apartment complex and anticipated no need for additional personnel to protect the site. No comments were received from the Ukiah Unified School District, but Planning Department staff anticipates that 45-60 children of school age would be occupants of the proposed apartment building. This is not considered a significant enrollment increase since many of the children expected to occupy the proposed apartments are already enrolled at area schools since many of the potential occupants would be Ukiah area residents looking for better housing. City Community Services staff reviewed the proposed apartment units and indicated no substantial impacts to local publi~; recreation facilities are anticipated since the projected increase in area population would be approximately 75 persons, an increase local parks could support. Furthermore, the project site would have an on-site recreational area and is located within walking distance of play fields at three local schools. The proposed apartment building would be privately owned, and would not require public maintenance of its facilities. The development of this use would require extensive trenching and other work to construct underground electrical transmission lines and to connect to off-site water and sewer lines. However, Public Utilities staff reviewed the project and determined this work could be supervised and inspected by City of Ukiah staff without increases in staff levels or work hours. No other impacts to other governmental service would be caused by the project since no other governmental agencies provide services on the property. b. Mitigation: None required. 14. ENERGY: The construction and operation of the proposed apartment building would require the use of fuels and other common energy sources, such as electricity. a. Impacts: It is not anticipated the development and operation of the proposed apartment building would require substantial levels of fuels or other energy sources since it would be constructed with an energy-efficient design and materials. In addition, the structure would be built on a parcel that is located within walking distance of schools, banks; stores, and larger employers such as the County Administration Center, which may result jn fewer vehicle traffic trips. It is not anticipated the construction and operation of the building would require the development of additional sources of energy since the project site is in service areas for existing electrical and natural gas transmission utilities and fossil fuel dispensers. b. Mitigation: None required. 22 15. UTILITIES- The development of the apartment building would require 'minor expansion of electrical transmission facilities and extensions to existing sewer and water mains that serve the site. a. Impacts: Staff of the City Electrical Department indicated the provision of electrical service to the site will require expansion of the existing electrical transmission systems located on the site, and that this service must be placed in underground trenches within a public utility easement to allow installation and maintenance. However, staff also noted the anticipated levels of work would not cause long-term power stoppage or any other significant adverse impacts to existing electrical transmission facilities in the area. Water and sewer services could also be connected to existing water and sewer mains located in the public rights-of-way for Bush Street a,nd Low Gap Road. Staff from the Water and Sewer Department reviewed project plans and determined that the water and sewer connections required to serve the apartment building would not cause long-term stoppages or adverse modifications to existing systems. b. Mitigation: None required. 16. HUMAN HEALTH- The subject property is in an area of the City that is generally recognized as having no known sources of contamination or other hazardous conditions that could expose persons to existing health hazards or create new health hazards. a. Impacts: The proposed apartment building is located in an area of the City of Ukiah with no known sources of contamination or other hazards. Furthermore, there is nothing in the proposed design or operation of the building that would expose its occupants or users of abutting properties to any known health hazards. b. Mitigation: None required. 17. AESTHETICS: The development of the proposed apartment building would require the demolition of an existing duplex and several outbuildings, but none of these buildings is especially known for its aesthetic values. a. Impacts: The development of the proposed apartment building would require the demolition of an existing duplex structure, but none of these buildings are known for any unique aesthetic values. The apartment building would be three stories high, which would make it highly visible to the users of abutting residences, offices, and schools that abut the site. It would not, however, obstruct any scenic vista since there is no such vista in the area. 23 It would also not create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view since the three-story building would be set back from the public right-of-way and would be largely screened by single-story buildings on the north, south, and west, and by landscaping on all four sides. Furthermore, the building design includes windows, inset walls and stairwells, porticos, and other design amenities to effectively break the up the mass of the building walls. These walls would also be covered with vinyl siding patterned to resemble lap-wood siding, and manufactured in contrasting colors. b. Mitigation: None required. 18. RECREATION: The closest City-maintained recreation area is Vineyard Park, which is located approximately one-quarter mile to the northeast of the project site. · a. Impacts: Planning staff estimates the proposed apartment units would be occupied by 60-75 persons and it is anticipated these persons would regularly use Vineyard Park and other City-maintained parks, as well as City-run recreation programs. According to the Community Services Department, no significant adverse impacts to existing facilities and programs are expected since these facilities and programs have adequate staff and resources to accommodate additional users. In addition, it is anticipated that residents of the Ukiah Valley who already regularly use these facilities and programs would occupy a majority of the apartments. b. b. Mitigation: None required. 19. CULTURAL RESOURCES: According to resources maintained by the City of Ukiah, there are no known significant historical, architectural, or ethnic resources on the site. a. Impacts: The development of the proposed apartment unit would require the demolition of the existing duplex and several outbuildings located on the subject property, but none of these structures have any known historical or architectural significance. Furthermore, there are no other known prehistoric, historical, or cultural values associated with the property. b. Mitigation: None required. 20. AIR QUALITY: Potential impacts to air quality at a project site are measured by the concentrations of a pollutant in the atmosphere above the site, which are largely dependent on the volumes of pollutant emitted and the atmosphere's ability to dilute the pollutant. The project site is located within the Ukiah Valley air basin, where air quality has generally been in compliance with the attainment levels required for all air-borne pollutants by the federal and state air quality standards. According to information received from the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, the only known exceptions to air quality attainment consist of isolated, but regular, occurrences of non-attainment for small particulate matter (PM- 10). 24 20. AIR QUALITY: Potential impacts to air quality at a project site are measured by the concentrations of a pollutant in the atmosphere above the site, which are la.rgely dependent on the volumes of pollutant emitted and the atmosphere's ability to dilute the pollutant. The project site is located within the Ukiah Valley air basin, where air quality has generally been in compliance with the attainment levels required for all air-borne pollutants by the federal and state air quality standards. According to information received from the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, the only known exceptions to air quality attainment consist of isolated, but regular, occurrences of non-attainment for small particulate matter (PM- 10). a. Impacts: The development of the proposed apartment building would cause increases in pollutants from vehicle emissions caused by traffic to and from the site. However, this increase is not expected to cause substantial increases in emission volumes, or any violations of any State or Federal air quality standards or impacts to local or regional air quality since the number of vehicle' trips would not entail substantial increases in overall traffic volumes. In fact, staff anticipates many of the proposed apartments will be occupied by persons that already live and work in the Ukiah Valley, which would cause emission volumes to increase at an even lower rate. The development of the three-story apartment building could cause alterations to air movements since it would be approximately 36 feet high, but it would not cause adverse impacts since it would be located far enough from other structures to avoid the funneling effects caused by multiple high-rise buildings. It is also not anticipated that moisture, temperature, or other climatic changes would be caused by the structure since it is not large enough to substantially alter these region-wide climatic forces. The development of the proposed apartments could also cause creation of odors due to household products and trash accumulation common to residential use. However, there is no known source of any objectionable odors associated with this development and no evidence that the odors associated with the project would be significant, particularly since such odors are common to this type of development. b. Mitigation: None required. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a. Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? YES 25 b. Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod term, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals? (A shod-term impact on the environment is one, which occurs, in a relatively brief, but definitive, period of time; long-term impacts will endure into the future). YES ~ NO C. Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may have impacts on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) YES ~ NO d. Substantial Adverse: Does the project have environmental effect that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES '"/ NO 22. DETERMINATION- On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that, although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described within the initial study will be incorporated into the design of the project or required by the City of Ukiah. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be ~ Charles Stump (~/~ Sigaa~ure / Print Name Sonar Planner / Environmental Coordinator Auqust 31, 1999 Title Date 26 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8f DATE'. October 20,1999 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY: On September 15, 1999, the City Council considered the proposed amendments to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance, and after a lengthy discussion, decided to continue the matter to allow more time for study and analysis. While staff was not specifically directed to generate additional information for the Council, Vice Mayor Ashiku did submit a letter subsequent to the meeting with suggested changes to the Ordinance (attached). Staff has reviewed Vice Mayor Ashiku's suggestions, and agrees with most, but not all of them. A discussion of the suggestions and staff recommendations are provided on pages 2 and 3 of this Agenda Summary Report. The proposed amended Ordinance has not been modified to reflect Councilmember Ashiku's suggested changes. If supported by the Council during the introduction of the Ordinance, they will be added to the text of the final version presented for adoption. Staff recommends that the City Council proceed with the public hearing, and then introduce the Ordinance by title only with the modifications listed below. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Introduce the Ordinance by title only amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance including: 1) incorporating the changes made by the Planning Commission except for the reduction in mixed-use acreage, and adding language allowing for a deviation in the "use" percentages; and 2) incorporating modifications 1,2,3,4, 5(portion),8,11(portion)12, 14,15 (portion), and 18 suggested by Vice Mayor Ashiku as illustrated in attachment No. 2. ' ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the Ordinance and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Publicly noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code. Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, Bob Sawyer, Planning Director, and David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1. Amended Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance 2. Correspondence submitted by Vice Mayor Ashiku, dated October 11, 1999 3. Agenda Summary Report, dated September 15, 1999 4. Proposed Draft Resolution submitted by Councilmember Baldwin Candace Horsley, City M~ager APPROVED' AlP PD ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS September, 1999 PROFESSIONAL OFFICE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL 15 ACRES RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED MIXED USE (currently designated "Industrial") RETAIL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AUTOMOTIVE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL NORTH Correspondence Received From Vice Mayor Ashiku Vice Mayor Ashiku's correspondence suggests that the Council consider eighteen changes to the proposed Ordinance. For ease of review and discussion, staff has numbered each suggested change on the face of the letter, which is included as attachment No. 2. Staff agrees with most, but not all of the suggestions. Specifically, we recommend that Items 1,2,3,4,5(portion),8,11(portion),12,14,15(portion), and 18 be included in the Ordinance. The following discussion analyzes the remaining Items, and explains why staff does not recommend that they be included in the Ordinance. Item 5: This Item contains a number of suggestions. Staff agrees with all of them except for the suggestion of deleting delicatessens, sandwich shops, small sit-down restaurants (no drive-thru restaurants) small grocery or convenience stores, and banking facilities from the permitted (Use Permit required) uses in the Industrial Designation. These items were added as permitted uses in 1996 to address traffic and air quality concerns. The purpose is to provide these services within walking distance of industrial employment centers to discourage automobile use. Staff recommends retaining these uses as "permitted uses" in the Industrial Designation. Item 6: It is suggested that the language in the Professional Office Designation that allows a small commercial project to proceed without an office component be deleted. This language is structured to ensure future professional office use on 80 percent of the land. Staff does not share the conclusion that by allowing the small commercial component to proceed ahead of the office component will automatically lead to the total commercialization of professional office designated property. Staff does not support the deletion of this language. Item 7: It is suggested that the provision permitting small retail commercial shops within the Professional Office Designation be deleted. This provision was added to permit (with the securing of a Use Permit) small shops to locate adjacent to professional offices. The purpose is to provide small shopping opportunities within walking distance of office employment centers to discourage automobile use. Staff does not support the deletion of this language. Item 9: It is suggested that the "deviation from percent requirement" within the mixed-use designation be deleted to preserve the integrity of the mixed-use concept. The Council will recall that the Planning Commission is recommending that within the mixed-use designation, a minimum of 40 percent of a development be dedicated to industrial uses, a maXimum 30 percent be dedicated to retail commercial, and 30 percent to either professional offices or additional industrial uses. Staff agrees with this percentage requirement, provided "deviation" language is added to provide the Planning Commission with the flexibility to deviate from the percentages if findings are made that the site planning and architecture are exemplary and exceed the minimum requirements, and that the proposed mix of land uses substantially conforms to the spirit and intent of the Mixed- Use Designation. Staff believes that the deviation language is important to assist in the effort to ensure high architectural and aesthetic quality in the AlP. Staff recommends retaining the "deviation from percentage" provision. Item 10: Mixed-Use Designation: It is suggested that the language allowing an office or retail commercial project to proceed without an industrial component provided 40 percent is retained for a future industrial project be deleted. Staff respectfully disagrees, and does not share the conclusion that by allowing an office or commercial component to proceed ahead of the industrial component will automatically lead to total commercialization of the Mixed-Use designated property. Staff recommends retaining this provision. Item 11: Staff agrees with the suggested reorganization that clearly specifies which uses are regarded as industrial, commercial, and professional offices within the Mixed-Use Designation. However, staff does not agree with deleting retail commercial from the "commercial uses," nor do we agree with modifying the percentages to require a minimum of 50 percent industrial and a maximum of 20 percent for commercial and professional offices uses. We continue to suggest that retail commercial land uses (30 percent maximum) can co-exist with industrial and professional office uses if designed properly. In addition, it is stated that there is plenty of land elsewhere in the AlP to accommodate retail commercial development. Our research reveals that this is not the case. The remaining vacant retail commercial (unrelated to automotive land uses) land totals approximately 1 acre. Item 13: Staff agrees that additional architectural design criteria could be added to the Ordinance that would provide more direction, and perhaps define what is regarded as "exemplary" design. However, given the fact that staff, at the recent direction of the Council, is working on a broader community-wide approach on this issue, we suggest that no language be added at this time. It seems more prudent to wait until the community-wide approach is developed, and then either amend the AlP Ordinance at that time, or overlay the broader approach on the AlP. Staff recommends that no language be added at this time. Item 15: We agree that adding the Airport Master Plan density requirement to the Ordinance would be beneficial to prospective developers. However, the standard for the B-1 compatibility zone is 60 people per acre, rather than 90. Staff disagrees with adding language requiring the review and approval of the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Commission concerning "clustering" the allowed density on a portion of a parcel. Item 16: The suggested language is a bit vague. There is no direction in terms of how to preserve, facilitate, and integrate proposed uses with possible future multiple use of the railroad right-of-way. The Planning Commission is recommending, and staff supports the following language: "Property owners of parcels with frontage along the railroad right-of-way are encouraged to plan for possible future use of the railroad." Item 17: It is suggested that additional findings be added to Section Twelve of the Ordinance. Staff disagrees with the suggested findinqs, because they are essentially included in findinqs "b" and "c" of the same Section. CONCLUSIONS: Staff continues to support the Planning Commission recommendations except for reducing the total Mixed-Use area from 32 to 15 acres. Staff also recommends that if the "use" percentages are included, that the deviation language is incorporated into the Ordinance to provide decision makers with important flexibility. Staff also agrees with Vice Mayor Ashiku on many of his suggestions for the Ordinance. However, we do not support some of his suggestions, which are aimed at preserving the pureness and integrity of the industrial land use designation. Staff continues to find merit in permitting certain limited commercial land use opportunities within the Industrial Designation to promote land use patterning that discourages the use of the automobile, and that will help facilitate aesthetically pleasing development. Staff also continues to support the use percentages recommended by the Planning Commission, rather than those suggested by Vice Mayor Ashiku. We believe that the 40 percent minimum industrial component requirement and 30 percent maximum commercial requirement, adequately preserve the industrial focus of the Mixed-Use designation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that after the conduct of a public hearing, the City Council Introduce the Ordinance by title only amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance including: 1) incorporating the changes made by the Planning Commission except for the reduction in mixed-use acreage, and adding language allowing for a deviation in the "use" percentages; and 2) incorporating modifications 1,2,3,4,5(portion), 8,11 (portion), 12,14,15(portion) and 18 suggested by Vice Mayor Ashiku, as illustrated in attachment No. 2. Draft Resolution Submitted by Councilmember Baldwin: Councilmember Baldwin has submitted a Draft Resolution related to the proposed amendments to the AlP Planned Development Ordinance (attachment No. 4). It is anticipated that Mr. Baldwin will discuss the Resolution with the Council during the consideration of the Ordinance amendments. ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: Section One The purpose of this amendment to the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planned Development IC31 IT.4 kJ,k.~T~ T.IT.,,,qk,~I~I IC31.11JI I LT~I I I III I~JIkJ~ 1.4...~111~ I,,,;IT~C;EI ~1 I I I%./I ~.~ %.;MI IVI,k~T;; L~,,I I I I,k~ LT./ I I IIJI qG C;;I%,,,%,~Ul C3L~,,.I~ %,;I IC;IIC3T.,;L~,,I I~..~;; T~^I,b~I. III~J %Jq~,,vq~I%,/MIIIT.,.IIL~ C;;IIIM ~JI~k/VI~.,IT~ vvq~ll--%Jq~lll I~,..'d IC3111d Id,b~..,, %,.C3L~,,~:Jq~JI Iq~t3 II.,fl II, Jl. ldl~ I~ %,,,/111%.~%,~ %./%./llllllql,.,.l~.~lC;il L%,/ I 1%,/IT.,,q~.,~,~l%./I IC31 %.~llll,.~q[~O! &] IIITJI. JQLIIC311%,/%./IIIIII~I%.~IC31 L~,/ 1%~i.C;Jll %,./%JIIIIIIT~I~.~IC31! ,k.J/ I II~:JlIVVC3~ %.,~11q~l li.~T.J %.;T./IIIIIIq~IT, JI[;311%.~T~;II~IC;&I tk,;IJIlilllq~lq~lC31 I,%./ I II~IIVVC;;E~ %.,~II~IILq~%A %-~q~lilill%..l%JIC;ll. Ik;I IC31 I~; I.q~ LI I~; II IIdI, Jq,.~LI IC3I %,,Iq~,k,~l~l IC3LIT./I I I.~1 I I I I IC3q,.~ i~/~l I I I IC3~Eq~,,,. /-'T I Iq~VV ~k,4T,,,,.,k.,~l~l IC3LI~/I I Lq~;I I ! Iq~t,.J II 1%.4~.4~,.~LI IC311J'-%~4L%.,~I I II,.JLI Vq~ qk,,,,f%.,;I I II I ITel %.~1C31 I,~T,.~T.~I I C~T,.,IT.4~%.4. /-/ Section Two Section '", .... ....,~hree This ordinance also formally amends the Land Use Map that illustrates which land use designations are assigned to the various properties throughout the Airport Industrial Park. The (Hastings) being redesignated from Industrial to IndustnallMlxed~Usei The land use : designations apply to the 138~re Airport Industrial Park in the following manner: 1. Professional Office: Applies to the northwest portion of the site, bounded by Talmage Road on the north, Airport Park Boulevard on the east, and Commerce Drive on the south (approximately 8'.12!6 acres). 2. Highway Commercial: Applies only to the northeastern portion of the site, bounded by Talmage Road to the north, Airport Park Boulevard to the west, Highway 101 to the east, and the existing large commercial retail store property to the south (approximately 1.4 acres). 3. Retail Commercial' Applies to ~ t3i~acres north of Commerce Drive, and approximately -22 23!41;:acres south of Commerce Drive, bounded by Airport Park Boulevard on the west, and Highway 101 on the east. (approximately -36-:8-3 ~ acres ). . 1 Industrial: Applies to '~' ..... """"' "' '"-' ^ =-"'-'~ '---" '--'-"--' ~'---'- Industrial/Automotive Commercial' Applies to the c~pprc, xi,m,~,tc I %1 Iq;~ southern portion of the Redwood Business Park, south of Assessor's Parcel Nos. 180-080-44 and 45, east of Airport Park Boulevard, and fronting Highway 101 (appro~i~t~ a~re~ 8: T0~l';~:;.A~rea§e AIP~ A~ro~i~ately 1~38 Section~ EOUF The Airport Industrial Park Planned Development was originally approved by City Council Resolution No. 81-59 on March 3, 1981, embodied in Use Permit No. 81-39. It was amended and further articulated in 1991 when the City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-4. In 1993, the City Council adopted a revised Ordinance (929) to allow "General Commercial" in addition to the approved "Highway Oriented Commercial" land uses in the area bounded by Talmage Road on the north, Highway 101 on the east, Commerce Drive on the south, and Airport Park Boulevard on the west. previ0usly a use P ermiti o~ May ; 1996; the Git y council adopted:Ordinance 963; WhiCh regulations On ~une 9i ~ 99~; ::the P la~ Deve!bpmentwas: a mended::::again bY the adoption of Section Fou~ EiVe Airport Industrial Park Planned Development, as amended herein, provides a mixture of industrial, commercial, and office land uses within a Planned Development (PD), consistent with the City of Ukiah General Plan ~M~te~Pla~ la~d,:ase ~e~ig~ati~n. section ~ six The Development Map (Generalized Land Use Map) for this Planned Development, as , ,,.:.. ~.,., ~, o,, ,,,,,,'" ...: A:...., ,,,-, ~,o, ,-,...~..,.,,,,, ~, ,~,"" .~,,, ~he Development Map (Generalized Land u~e Map) attached as EXhibit !'A~ii is:a~pmvedi The Traffic Circulation Plan for this Planned Development is discussed in Section "D" "1" on page -1-8 20, and the Circulation Map, attached as Exhibit "B", is approved. Section Si~ se~en Development standards not addressed in the Planned Development regulations shall be those specified in the City of Ukiah Zoning Code. Section-Seve~ Eight Amendment to this ordinance requires City Council action. All Maj~va~ia~i Use and Site Development Permits for proposed developments within the Airport Industrial Park require City Planning Commission review and action. city zoning Ad~i~iStmt~ Decisions on ~aria~ Site Development and Use Permits made by the City Planning Commission ~Z~hi~§:Admi~.i~[~at~:are appealable to the City Council by-af~ =.., .... ,........~.. pursaa~t t~ sectio~9266 off. the UEiah~. Ma~iCipal,~C~dei Section Eight Nihe Some small commercial land uses may be permitted on the Industrial designated land if they are primarily intended to provide commercial type services to employees within the Airport Industrial Park. section ::~en Section~ Eleven The regulations for this Planned Development, as required in Article 14, Chapter 2 (Zoning), of;:the::~ki~hM~i¢ipal!~ are as follows: A. INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses The following industrial uses are allowed in the Industrial designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit. a. Manufacturing - activities or operations involving the processing, assembling, blending, packaging, compounding, or fabrication of previously prepared materials or substances into new products. b. Warehouse and Distribution Activities - includes warehousing, and storage not available to the general public; warehousing and distribution activities associated with manufacturing, wholesaling, or business uses; delivery and transfer services; freight forwarding; moving and storage; distribution terminals for the assembly and w breakdown of freight; or other similar use involving shipping, warehousing, and distribution activities. c. Wholesaling and Related Uses -includes establishments engaged in wholesale trade or warehousing activities including maintaining inventories of goods; assembling, sorting, and grading goods into large lots; breaking bulk and redistribution in smaller lots; selling merchandise to retailers, industrial, commercial, institutional, or business users, or other wholesalers. d. Contractor's Offices - includes business office for building, plumbing, electrical, roofing, heating, air conditioning, and painting contractors including storage of incidental equipment and supplies. e. Agricultural- allowed as a continuation of the existing land use, including all necessary structures and appurtenances. f. Research and Development Laboratories, and computer and data processing. g. Accessory Uses and Structures - activities such as administrative offices and warehouses which are related and ancillary to an allowed use. Ancillary structures containing ancillary uses shall be located on the same parcel as the primary use/structure, and shall not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of structure(s) containing the primary use. Permitted Uses The following small commercial, business support, and repair service land uses may be permitted in the Industrial land use designation with the securing of a Use a. Permit, provided they are situated on a parcel no larger than one-half acre in size: a. Delicatessen, sandwich shop, or small sit-down restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants shall be permitted). b. Small grocery or convenience store. c. Banking facility. d. Child day-care facility. e. Industrial and business support services - establishments primarily engaged in providing services to business and industry, such as blueprinting and photocopying, janitorial and building maintenance, equipment rental and leasing, medical labs, commercial testing laboratories, and answering services. f. Public Facilities - includes all public and quasi-public facilities such as utility substations, post offices, fire stations, and government offices. g. Repair Services -includes repair services such as radio and television, furniture, automotive repair, body and fender shops. h. Communication Installations -includes radio and television stations, telegraph and telephone offices, cable T.V., and micro- wave stations. I. Mini-storage facility. PROFESSIONAL OFFICE DESIGNATION PUrpose /-7 Generall~e~uiremen~ designation ~. Allowed Uses The following uses are allowed in the Professional Office designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: w a, Professional and business offices such as accountants, engineers, architects, landscape architects, surveyors, attorneys, advertising, consultants, bookkeeping, medical and dental offices, and other similar activities. b. Business and office support services - includes services such as branch banks, savings and loan, credit unions, insurance brokers, real estate sales, blueprinting and photocopying and answering services. d. Child day-care facility. Retail commercial in the built-out northwest portion of this area outside the boundaries of the Redwood Business Park. Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted in the Professional Office Designation with the securing of a Use Permit: ao Delicatessen, sandwich shop, or small sit-down restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants). b. Small grocery or convenience store. Gm deVelOpable !s~uare footage ~n: a parcel; HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses The following uses are allowed in the Highway Commercial designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: Ol a. Businesses such as motels, sit-down and drive-thru restaurants, service stations, and other similar uses that provide services and merchandise primarily to highway travelers. b. Retail commercial stores. RETAIL COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses The following uses are allowed in the Retail Commercial designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: a. Retail commercial stores. b. Child day-care facility. ,~u~,.,,, ,~.,~,,,~ ,.~,~, ~, ,,1~ ~, ,u , ~,~u Pe~mi~ed Uses The following uses are perturbed in the Re,ail Commercial designation wi~h ~he securing of a Use Permit: ~ ~'~' ........ ~"'~~"~- ..... "~' ~ .....Restaurants (no ~, U~ll~Q~OO~l Il OUl I~VVl~l I Ol IVy? vi Ol I lull Ol[-~VVVl I drive-thru restaurants). b. ~11 groce~ or convenience store. c. B~nking f~cility. INDUSTrIAL/AUTOMOTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses Th~ following uses ar~ allowed in the Industdal/~utomotive Commercial Land Oesign~tion with th~ securing of ~ ~ite Oevelop~nt Per. it: a. ~11 the ~llowed industrial uses listed in Ite~ ~ ~1) ~bove. 10 b. Automobile dealerships, except for those that exclusively sell used vehicles. 2. Permitted Uses The following uses are allowed in the Industrial/Automotive Commercial Land Use Designation with the securing of a Use Permit: a. All the permitted industrial land uses listed in Item A (2) above. b. Delicatessen, sandwich shop, or small sit-down restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants). c. Automotive service (gas) station d. Small grocery store, mini-market, or convenience store e. Uses related to automobile dealerships such as tire stores, auto parts stores, car washing facilities, automobile repair business, etc. MI~E. D~US E DESIG N~TION 1: purpose The ng~: allowed land ase in Mixed~se designation is. industrial and ight ma n a fa~a~ngi pa~po~e ~f the:: M i~e~u~e designation is to prOVide for a C0 m p a ti hie m iX: :: 0f~ indust~i al;: professional ~ffice; a;nd corn ~e rcia/I an d u s es: ;; 2; Genera IReq a ireme nts a: All :Mi~ed~USe designation mixed~use projects shall contain:a::, minimum:: of 40 percent InduStrial, and a maximum :of 30 :: percent 'retail :commercial land uses, The remaining 301: percent ;of :the: :square.:::footage · may be used for professional officesor additional:indUstdal uses. Deviation fromthe 11 desig ~ati0ni Allowed Uses asite Devel0pme~t Permit proaucts; 12 lots: Se lli ng :merch and is e~ tO: :~ retai le rs ~ in,dust ri al; commercial; in stitati~ali ,business ~ a~ersi:, ~the~WhOle~alers; contractors ;;Offices ~ ~buSiness office for building;; :: plumbing; inClUding storage of incidental equipment and supplies; processing lOCated On th e,sam:e parcel as the prima use/stmmum; and Shall n;ot exceed '. 25~o of ~h~ gross fi~: a re a of ~truct u re(s)cont ai ni ng the prim~;usei 13 Fi the securing of:a use Permit; a S~ali groCe~:~ Or ¢~ve~ience stem b Child day~a~e,::fa~il itv: ~for ~se~i:ng employ~es~:~ithin theAI P; c! Retail:, ¢~mercial, ~h~ a~d storesi d IndastHal a~d basin es S sa ppo~ :semi:ecs ~ eStablis hme~ts primarily e~geg~ i~ providing ~e~i~s and i~dast~; SUCh as janitorial and building maintenancei and equipment rental and leasing e Repai~ se~icesi i~¢ludi~g: aatomotive repai~ NUISANCES No lot shall be used in such a manner as to create a nuisance to adjacent parcels. Proposed uses shall comply with the performance criteria outlined below. a, All activities involving the storage of inflammable and explosive materials shall be provided with adequate safety devices against 14 the hazard of fire and explosion by adequate fire-fighting and fire suppression equipment and devices standard in industry. All incineration is prohibited. b, Devices which radiate radio-frequency energy shall be so operated as not to cause interference with any activity carried on beyond the boundary line of the property upon which the device is located. C, The maximum sound level radiated by any use of facility, when measured at the boundary line of the property upon which the sound is generated, shall not be obnoxious by reason of its intensity or pitch, as determined by standards prescribed in the Ukiah Municipal Code and/or City General Plan. d. No vibration shall be permitted so as to cause a noticeable tremor beyond the property line. e, Any use producing emissions shall comply with all the requirements of the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District. f. Projects involving the use of toxic materials or hazardous substances shall comply with all Federal, State, and all local Laws and regulations. 2. Prohibited Uses or Operations Industrial uses such as petroleum bulk stations, cement batching plants, pulp and paper mills, lumber mills, refineries, smelting plants, rendering plants, junk yards, auto wrecking, and similar "heavy industrial" uses which typically create external and environmental effects are specifically prohibited due to the detrimental effect 15 the use may have upon the general appearance, function, and environmental quality of nearby uses. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The following standards have been established to ensure compatibility among uses and consistency in the appearance and character of development. These standards are intended to guide the planning, design, and development of both individual lots and the entire Airport Industrial Park. Projects shall be reviewed on a case-by-case basis for high quality design, efficient function, and overall compatibility with surrounding land uses. 1. Minimum Lot Requirement The minimum lot area shall be 20,000 square feet. Each lot shall have a minimum frontage of 100 feet on a public street. Except for lots fronting on Airport Park Boulevard, or other public streets shown on the Land Use Map, access easements to a public street may be authorized in lieu of public street frontage in the discretion of the appropriate decision-maker and with the approval of the City Engineer. Proposed access easements shall be consistent with the standards contained in Table 4-1. The Planning Commission may approve a public street frontage of less than 100 feet for lots located on cul-de-sacs, street m curves, or having other extraordinary characteristics. Maximum Lot Coverage No more than 4~ 40 percent of the lot shall be covered by a building or structure. Above ground parking lots and landscaping areas shall not be included in the calculation of lot coverage. Indgst~al !~ uS~s ~Sy ~gV~[ a maximum of 50 percent of a lot prQvide~ that th~ ~ite :p!a~i~g~ itect~re; Pa~ki~g~ and landscaping am c~nsiste~t wit~: req~ire~ptS of ~I~ ~la~ p~lpPment Ordina n~, 16 3. Minimum Building Setbacks All buildings and structures shall be setback from the property line a minimum of 25 feet along the entire street frontage. Lots abutting U.S. Highway 101 shall maintain a minimum setback ~:~f 60 feet-,,.,A'~ ,....,,,,,,, o~,~,,~,.~,----'~-----'- from the property line adjacent to the freeway. Side yard setbacks shall be determined in the Site Development or Use Permit review process. 4. Maximum Building Height The maximum height of any building or structure shall be 50 feet. Mechanical penthouse and equipment may extend an additional 10 feet beyond the maximum building height. Additionally, all development within the Airport Industrial Park shall comply with the Federal Aviation Administration side slope criteria, and all the 1 Screening Storage areas, loading docks and ramps, transformers, storage tanks, refuse collection areas, mechanical equipment, and other appurtenant items of poor visual quality shall be screened by the use of masonry walls, landscaping materials, or decorative fencing. All roof mounted electrical and mechanical equipment and/or ductwork shall be screened from view by an enclosure which is consistent with the building design. Fences exceeding six (6) feet in height may be appropriate for some commercial and industrial uses to screen the outdoor storage of building materials, supplies, construction equipment, etc. The Planning Commission may consider fences exceeding six (6) on a case-by-case basis during the review of Site Development and Use Permit applications. 17 6. Public Utility Easement All lots shall provide a 5-foot easement in the required front setback for the provision of utilities. . Sidewalk Requirements Lots with frontages along the primary street shall provide a 5-foot curvalinear sidewalk located within the required front setback. The sidewalk may be located over the public utility easement. Every effort shall be made to link developments with attractive and accessible pedestrian facilities. . Bicycle Lanes Class III Bicycle lanes shall be provided on all streets according to CalTrans standards. 9. Development Integration Every effort shall be made to "master plan" development within the Airport Industrial Park. Applicants shall be encouraged to coordinate development proposals to ensure compatible architectural themes, high quality site planning, efficient and functional traffic circulation, coordinated pedestrian circulation, and compatible land uses. 10. Required Public Streets Lot line adjustments, parcel maps, tentative and final subdivision maps, and Site Development and Use Permits shall not be approved, unless public streets identified on the Land Use Map serving the parcels covered by the lot line adjustment, map or permit have been or will be dedicated to the City of Ukiah upon approval of the lot line adjustment, map or permit. 18 11. Street Width Standards The following street standards have been established by the Ukiah Department of Public Works. All primary and secondary streets shall be designed and constructed in accordance with these standards: Table 4-1: Minimum Street Standards Airport Park Boulevard and Commerce Drive Primary Secondary Access Easement . . Right-of-way Pavement a. travel lanes (2) b. left turn lane Curbs (both sides) Cul-de-sac (turn-arounds) Curb Returns Radius 66 feet 44 feet 64 feet 40 feet 14 feet 20 feet 12 feet 12 feet 1 foot 1 foot 100 feet diameter 35 feet 35 feet 32 feet 30 feet 15 feet 12. Access Driveways and Deceleration Lanes ao Every effort shall be made to minimize access driveways along Airport Park Boulevard. All driveway and intersection radii shall be designed to accommodate heavy truck turning movements, consistent with the requirements of the City Engineer. b. Every effort shall be made to design common driveways for individual developments. Co No Talmage Road access shall be permitted for ~ the parcel or parcels located: at the u theast:.¢~mer of Tal~age Road and Airp0~ Pa~ B~Ulevard 19 d. All major driveways, as determined by the City Engineer, shall have left turn pockets in the median area where feasible. e. Deceleration and acceleration lanes shall not be required unless the City Engineer determines they are necessary to ensure safety and efficient traffic flow. '13. Minimum Parking and Loading Requirements a. No loading or unloading shall be permitted on the street in front of the building. A sufficient number of off-street loading spaces shall be provided to meet the needs of the approved use. Adequate apron and dock space b. also shall be provided for truck maneuvering on individual lots. The number of entrance/exit driveways shall be limited to one per every C, 100 feet of street frontage with a maximum curb cut of 40 feet. The Planning Commission may relax these standards when a comprehensive plan for an entire block has been prepared and presented to the City Planning Commission for review and approval. Adequate off-street parking shall be provided to accommodate the parking needs of employees, visitors, and company vehicles. The minimum number of off-street parking spaces shall generally be provided according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code. do The Planning Commission may deviate from the parking requirements contained in the Ukiah Municipal Code on a case-by-case basis. Any deviation must be supported by findings related to a unique use, such as a mixed use development, or use not specifically described in the Ukiah 20 Hn Municipal Code, and findings that otherwise demonstrate no on-street parking congestion will result. 14. Siqna_oe Except as indicated below, building identification and other signs shall generally comply with the sign regulations for industrial, commercial and office land uses contained in the Ukiah Municipal Code. All proposed development projects shall include a detailed sign program. DESIGN GUIDELINES The following guidelines shall be used by the Planning Commission when approving a Site Development or Use Permit to ensure high quality design, and the coordination and consistency of development. 1. Landscapin~ and O_Den Space a. A comprehensive landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval as a part of the Site Development or Use Permit process· b. Existing trees shall be retained whenever possible. c. A variety of tree species shall be used that provides diversity in form, texture, and color. d. Landscaping at corners should be arranged to maintain traffic visibility. e. Landscaping along an entire street frontage should be coordinated to achieve a uniform appearance. f ' . ~gl I~gVg~ll I~ II I ~gl ~11 I~ IV[g gl Igll II IVI~ g ~gl I~[~ VI [I ~ g~Vl~g [I lO[ ~111 ~IVVIU~ gUIIl~l~ll[ gllgUIIl~ III LIl~ OUIIIIII~I I I1~ IIIgJVIIL~ I~111~ 21 h. ....... ,.t ....~'"" "~ ""'";"" '"' -'"" dc. pc, nd upon '~'^ ~"---- of t.~1 lull LI ""'":"- ~"""""' '~'" ' ..... * '""'~ ..... '~ '~'" ' '"" The ~""' "" '~ "-'-,,,,~, ,, ,~ ,~,~ .,, ,,., ,,., ,.oo, ,., ,,. ,, ,~ 3pocles .,f t, ..~ ' '""'~ u ~.~ ~., ~A. ' "~ ....... ~ .... '-'"' ~, ,,~,, ..~,~, ,,,,, ,~ ,, ,~ sppropd~',tc .... ~---- ,,,-,, ,,~,.., ,.,, t, ,..~o foi~ · . I~/QI ~-~,.~10I IC311 b~r ~ -~ -, ...:,L...,....,~ .... ,...:..,.. The P~c~n~b,3 ,.,,,,,,,,,,~.~,,,,, IC311~,~O~Ql~;;~,~ V¥1LI I ~,./IC311LII I~::~ I I IC3I.~.,~I ,, ,~ ~, ,-,?~, .~, ,.,, If unique "; ...~,~. ,~ ........... ,~ .... ,...~..... ~f VVILII LI I~,~ ~,lq,~q~, VVMUI~ MIq~q~l~l~,,jId~,~ C3 L~,~I I I~'~'~'f/'("'"~'l' /~l ~'0~% L~,nd~c~, ng f.,,u .......... ,.,,..,., .... '-,, ,-,,-,~,, ,, ,,.,,~ ..... ~,~,, ,, ~ci~ 'vV;fl', · · ,..~ .-: ,.., ,.J ,CI ,.,,..,., ..; ..~ ,.. VC3i IIM~4 IIq~JVVq~l II I~:~ ~C3Lrb~l I I~ ,-,;,,.~ ,,.,, ....... , ,;,, ~,;,~ ~, ,u,, ,.,~ ,.,,o,..,.,,.,, ,;,.,..,.. ;n ,, ,,.. Ic, nd~cc, pb.g --'-.-- ~../I g I I. All I ..., ,..~ ,.J ,.. ,., ,., ,.., ; ,.., .,.., ..,,k~ll I~,.... ,.",.,..-.,,.~,.,,-I,. 22 23 1 1 1 Orientation and Location of Buildings a. The location of buildings shall be coordinated with other buildings and open space on adjacent lots, and should include design elements, oriented to pedestrian usage, such as, linked walkways and sidewalks. b. Buildings should be sited to preserve solar access opportunities, and should include passive and active solar design elements. c. Buildings should be oriented to minimize heating and cooling costs. d. Buildings should be creatively sited to provide open views of the site and surrounding environment. e. Buildings shall not be sited in the middle of large parking lots. Architectural Design a. Individual projects shall exhibit a thoughtful and creative approach to site planning and architecture. b. Projects shall be designed to avoid the cumulative collection of large structures with similar building elevations and facades. c. Buildings shall be limited in height, bulk, and mass, and shall be designed to avoid a box-like appearance. Building Exteriors a. Colors and building materials shall be carefully selected, and must be compatible with surrounding developments, and shall be finalized during 24 the Site Development or Use Permit process. b. The Planning Commission may permit exterior walls of architectural metal where it is compatible with adjacent structures, and the overall appearance and character of the Airport Industrial Park. 5. Lighting a. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review and approval with all Site Development and Use Permit applications. b. Lighting for developments shall include shielded, non-glare types of lights. c. Lighting shall not be directed towards Highway 101, the Ukiah Municipal Airport, o~ adjacent properties, rd~ t~ward~.:::the ~ky, 6. Design Amenities a. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided near the entrance to buildings. One (1) bicycle space shall be provided for every ten (10) employees, plus one (1) space for every fifty (50) automobile parking spaces. b. Fountains, kiosks, unique landscape islands, outdoor sitting areas, and other quality design amenities are encouraged. CIRCULATION PLAN The Circulation Plan for the Airport Industrial Park is illustrated on the attached Exhibit "B". As shown, the plan includes points of access at Talmage Road at the north, Hastings Avenue at the northwest, and Airp~ R~ad ~t the SO~thwestl In lieu of the originally en~i~i s°~h~rn :.'ac r°~ ~irpo~: Pa~k B~levard t0 NOrgard Lane)an emergency access is provided through the airport to a fUture gated encroachment along the southern portion of Airport Road. Internal access includes an extension of Airport Road from the west into the southern portion of the site; Airport Park Boulevard from Talmage 25 Road on the north, extending south to intersect with the Airport Road extension; and Commerce Drive from west to east in the northern portion of the AlP. All streets within the AlP shall be public ~- ..... '~ ............ '~ cor;,cc, pt ...... ~---'--.----, ---- ,~-- --.--'---'.-..-, · I I i1~, q~1~./uLI I~11 I c3~..~,~.~,q~q,~ I vc3~.J ! c3~..~ ~..,.I IVlq,.~l~r,./i i~..q~j vi ILI I~ VI I~:~11 IC31 ~1 LI I~,~ ,~111~,/~,./i L II I~,,J~J~,~LI IC31 MCa1 i~ I'~ I~LCall I~,~1! L./~,JL ~.C3~,.~L ~,J~.~q~l~:~l I C31 1~4 iI~/~.JLii i~::~ i~ n,-~.~ ;&L~ ~.~ pi IT;~, LI IT,.. I II;'"'"'"l'""JI. I,.,/IT.~,M , ....... l%.,~l 0~%..,%,~,1 l I%~C;3i IdrV ;'C;'"'" Il .......... C30O~,II I I~T.,J.I P~pe~y Ow~ers ef parcels With frontage along Ji DISCRETIONARY REVIEW The discretionary permit review process for development projects within the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) is the same as for discretionary permits elsewhere in the City. As articulated in Section 9 of this ordinance, a Site Development Permit or Use Permit is required for development projects proposed in the AlP. 1. Site Development Permits and Use Permits a. As articulated in Section 9 above, development projects within the Airport Industrial Park are subject to the Site Development or Use Permit process, depending upon the proposed use and its location. A Site Development Permit shall not be required for any development proposal requiring a Use Permit. Within the Use Permit review process, all site development issues and concerns shall be appropriately analyzed. b. All Maj~ Use Permits, Variances, and Site Development Permits for proposed developments within the Airport Industrial Park require City Planning Commission review and action. ~i~:r ~e~ermitsi Variances~ C, do Decisions on Site Development and Use Permits made by the City Planning Commission and:i: ':~in torare appealable to the City Council pursuant to Section 9266 of the Ukiah Municipal Code. Major modifications to approved Site Development Permits and Use Permits, as determined by the Planning Director, shall require the filing of a new application, payment of fees, and a duly noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission. Minor modifications to approved Site Development Permits and Use Permits, as determined by the Planning Director, shall require the filing of a new application, payment of processing fees and a duly noticed public hearing before the City Zoning Administrator. e. The Planning Commission's decision on major modifications to an approved Site Development Permit, Variance or Use Permit is appealable to the City Council. The Zoning Administrator's decision on minor modifications to an approved Site Development Permit, Variance or Use Permit is appealable directly to the City Council. ,Building Modifications ag b. Exterior modifications to existing buildings shall be designed to complement and harmonize with the design of the existing structure and surrounding developments. A Site Development Permit shall be required for all tantial exterior modifications to existing structures, site design el~Dts, and landscaping within the Airport Industrial Park. The application procedure shall be that prescribed in ~iCl~i:!:20 the Ukiah Municipal Code. 27 28 affi~i re~e~ei revise ~ ~dify the appealed de~isi~n of the Planning Section ~ Thi~een This Ordinance shall be published as required by law and shall become effective thirty (30) days after it is adopted. Introduced by title only on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Passed and adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: by the following roll call vote: by the following roll call vote: Jim Mastin, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk 29 IIIitli , i I i IIIIitl IIIIII · II I Iit I · EXHIBIT "A" C~a~rct~l REDWOOD BUSINESS PARK A third access point to the provided across the airport to a gated encroachment along the soulhern portion of Airport Road ~ AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK EXHIBIT 'B" ~' ",, ' .' '~, '- i. ~':; '-' . ~. ','~ AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK · · . . ""'" >'""' Circulation Plan ' .~.'¢.'-; ;'.'. 2.;'. · . .. October 11, 1999 Charlie Stump, Senior Planner City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Charlie, I am providing my comments on the proposed AIP Planned Development Ordinance Amendment, albeit later than I had desired. Please forward a copy to all Council Members. At the September 15th Council Meeting I addressed a number of concerns with the proposed ordinance, focusing on the progressive conversion of the industrial purpose of the AIP to commercial uses. While my concerns cannot be entirely ameliorated, I believe the following address the most offensive portions of the ordinance. I leave it to Staff to craft the appropriate legalese in the proposed ordinance itself. Section One: Last sentence, change "... and to encourage a variety of commercial uses that can co-exist" to "and allow compatible uses that can co-exist..." Section Three: In reality, development constraints on the AIP owned by the City make it most logical to redesignate the City's land as Industrial/Mixed Use, rather than the land under consideration. The high infrastructure and site development costs will, per square foot, exceed the cost to acquire prime Industrial land with infrastructure in the AIP currently designated for industrial uses. It is illogical to conclude that the City's land Industrial holdings is available for viable industrial development without substantial investment of public funds. Section Eight: Second reference should also be to Major Variance. As an aside, I noted a number of inconsistencies in terms and format in the ordinance which should be corrected. Section Eleven: Industrial Designation: (A)(1)(b): "... or nonretail business use...". Industrial Designation: (B)(2): By adopting the Industrial/Mixed -Use Designation, Industrial land becomes more precious. The land committed to commercial, business support and repair service land uses should be more aligned with industrially related uses, with a cap on percentage of the total Industrial Designation. · As a tradeoff, this section should be modified to delete subparagraphs a, b, c and i. There is plenty of area reserved for uses listed under a, b, c and d; mini-storage is a poor use of Industrial land in the AIP. · Subparagraphs e, f, g and h should be limited to one-half acre parcels not to exceed 20 percent of the total Industrial Designation. Professional Office Designation (B)(2)(b): Beginning with the second sentence, delete the future type of furore promise which has historically led to conversion of set-aside alternative. It is this land from its original intent when expedient. STAFF SUPPORT STAFF SUPPORT STAFF SUPPORT STAFF SUPPORT PARTIAL SUPPORT Z-I 7 16) Professional Office Designation (B)(3)(c): Delete new subsection. Mixed-Use Designation (F)(1): Change to "Industrial/Mixed Use" here and throughout ordinance. Reword to better express the intent, such as "The primary land uses in the Industrial/Mixed Use Designation are intended to be industrial and light manufacturing, with secondary emphasis on a mix of compatible commercial and professional office land uses." Industrial/Mixed-Use Designation (F)(2)(a): Delete the "deviation from percent requirement" language, in order to preserve the integrity of the mixed use intent. The proposed ordinance in its entirety constitutes a deviation from the original Industrial purpose of the AIP. As proposed, not only is the City giving up another 50 percent of the remaining Industrial area of the AIP (which was less than 50 percent of the original 138 acres) for the mixed use concept (which I find to be a guise for more commercial uses), but the proposal further and arbitrarily sacrifices additional industrial land in exchange for "exemplary design and architecture." The development standards under (G) require high, if not exemplary, design throughout the AlP. Architecture should befit the location and intended uses. Industrial/Mixed-Use Designation (F)(2)(b): As above, delete the language which allows a professional office or retail project on the promise of preserving the rear 40 percent for future industrial uses. The primary intent is industrial; commercial and professional office are secondary. The statement that the "land dedicated to a future industrial component must be logically and genuinely planned for such as use" brings to mind that too much land has already been converted on the promise of furore industrial use. Industrial/Mixed-Use Designation (F)(3) and (F)(4): Reorganize section by specifying which uses fall under the industrial percentage and which are counted as commercial or professional office uses. Reorganize the permitting requirements. Modify percentages so that industrial remains as at least 50 percent, with a mix of a minimum of 20 percent of both commercial and professional office land uses. Uses requiring a site development permit: Industrial uses: a. Manufacturing b. Warehouse and Distribution c. Wholesaling and Related Uses Commercial uses: a. Contractor's offices and yards b. Computer and data processing d. Repair services e. Accessory uses and structures (in the last sentence, state "and shall not exceed 25 percent of the gross floor area of the primary use.") Professional office uses: a. Professional and business offices: Uses requiring a use permit: Industrial uses: a. Research and development laboratories b. Any other industrial use, excluding Prohibited Uses or Operations in F.2. Commercial uses: a. Industrial and business support services b. Child care, upon a finding of necessity for employees of the park. STAFF SUPPORT PARTIAL SUPPORT c. Delicatessen, sandwich shop, caf6 (excludes large scale restaurant/drive-thru Note: Delete from section grocery stores and retail commercial - already plenty of land elsewhere in the park.) Professional office uses: a. Business and office support services /g /4- /7 Development Standards (G)(2): Clarify that not more than 40 percent of each lot shall be covered by buildings or structures (rather than one building or structure). Industrial land uses may cover a maximum of 60 percent of a lot. Development Standards (G)(3): Consider adding a criteria for coordination of theme, architecture throughout the AIP, or sections of the AIP. What type of criteria would be considered as "exemplary"- perhaps some of the criteria should be added to the development design and architecture standards. Development Standards (G)(5): Consider, lighting location and design shall stress security and safety, and shall minimize energy usage. Development Standards: Add a specific finding of consistency with the Airport Land Use Plan. Specify that density in the B-1 zone shall be limited to 90 persons per acre. Density averaging to cluster some or all of the density allowed on the lot or parcel on a portion of the lot or parcel shall require review by the Mendocino County Airport land Use Commission. Circulation Plan (I): Parcels with frontage along the railroad right-of-way shall be designed to preserve and facilitate and integrate with the possible future multiple use of the right of way. Section Twelve: Add the following £mdings: · That the use will not decrease the area, parcels, lots, or percentage of land used or intended for furore industrial uses. · That the determination preserves the primary intent that land in the Industrial and Industrial/Mixed Use Designations shall be used for true Industrial uses. Other: Change all references to "Mixed-Use" through-out the ordinance to "Industrial/Mixed- Use." STAFF SUPPORT STAFF SUPPORT PARTIAL SUPPORT STAFF SUPPORT Sincerely, Phillip Ashiku Vice-Mayor ITEM NO. 8a DATE:_September 15,1999 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY: Staff is initiating an amendment to the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planned Development Ordinance that would redesignate approximately 32 acres of pure industrial land to a m~xed-use land use designation. The new Mixed-Use concept would allow or permit a mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses. The 32 acres is situated along the west side of Airport Park Boulevard, south of Commerce Drive (see map on page 2). The Planning Commission is recommending that the 32 acres be, reduced to approximately 15 acres, and that "use" percentages be established on individual parcels requiring a minimum of 40% of the square footage to be dedicated to industrial uses, and that a maximum of 30% be dedicated to retail commercial land uses. The remaining 30% could be professional office space or additional industrial square footage. Additional Planning Commission recommendations are listed on page 3. The proposed Mixed-Use land use designation has been created to reflect a more modern approach to planning for development in the Airport Industrial Park. It is intended to provide for industrial and manufacturing land uses that would be supported by compatible eateries, professional offices, retail shops, and commercial services, such as small banking facilities and child care operations. Additional amendments to the Ordinance include adding a "Purpose" section to the Professional Office land use designation, and permitting small retail commercial opportunities with the securing of a Use Permit. Other proposed amendments include adding language requiring all development to be in compliance with RECOMMENDED ACTION: (Continued on page 3) Introduce the Ordinance amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance, incorporating the changes made by the Planning Commission except for the reduction in mixed-use acreage, and adding language allowing for a deviation in the "use" percentages. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the Ordinance and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Publicly noticed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code. Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with' Candace Horsley, City Manager, Bob Sawyer, Plannin9 Director, and David Rapport City Attorney , Attachments: 1. Amended Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 25, 1999 3. Plannin9 Commission Minutes, dated August 25, 1999 4. Location Map, Site Plan/Elevation Drawings for the Mountanos SDP 99-15 project (informational) Cand~--~e H°rsley City Manger1 ~~'i~ AlP PD ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS September, 1999 PROFESSIONAL OFFICE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL 15 ACRES RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMM PROPOSED MIXED USE (currently designated "Industrial") RETAIL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AUTOMOTIVE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL the provisions of the Ukiah Airport Master Plan; reducing the maximum lot coverage from 45 percent to a more realistic 40 percent; increasing the setback from Highway 101 from 40 feet to 60 feet; revising the landscaping requirements to be consistent with the newly adopted provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code; and other minor language changes. BACKGROUND: During the spdng of 1999, a property owner in the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) approached the City about constructing a mixed-use development on his property. The uses included a compatible mix of light industrial, professional office, and retail commercial. The current Planned Development Ordinance for the AlP is conventional in nature and it does not allow or permit such a mix of land uses. After discussing the matter internally, staff concluded that a broader application of a mixed-use designation would fulfill the General Plan's direction for a "Master Plan Area" for the AlP, and would provide the necessary tool for ensudng logical and ordedy development. In addition, it would provide more flexibility to property owners to develop their parcels in response to market conditions and local needs. It would also provide opportunity for a certain eclecticism in uses, site planning and architecture that would preclude an uninteresting collection of monotonous and dull developments in the subject area. Finally, it would help fulfill the goal of creating a more sustainable community within the AlP by providing compatible commercial services in close proximity to places of employment. , · The additional proposed amendments are intended to "update" the Ordinance, clarify vagueness, provide increased flexibility in the Professional Office designation, and bring a number of standards into consistency with recently adopted standards for other Zoning Districts. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the proposed AlP Planned Development Ordinance amendments on August 25, 1999. After considerable discussion, they formulated a recommendation for adoption of the Ordinance with a number of significant changes. The most notable modifications recommended by the Planning Commission are to reduce the total amount of Mixed-Use land from 32 acres to 15 acres, and to establish allowed percentages for industrial (minimum 40%), and commercial (maximum 30%) land uses. 1. Page 1 of Recommended Ordinance - First sentence of new language Change the name of the new designation from "Mixed-Use" to "Industrial Mixed-Use." Carry this change throughout the Ordinance. Staff supports this recommendation. 2. Page 3 of Recommended Ordinance - No. 4 and 6 Do not apply the Mixed-Use designation to the entire 32 acres. Instead, apply it only to the six northern parcels, which comprises approximately 15 acres. Change the total acreage of the Industrial and Mixed-Use designations to reflect this modification. Staff respectfully disagrees with the Planning Commission and does not support this recommendation. It is staff's opinion that the notion that an ideal hiqh-tech clean industrial use with high paying jobs for local citizens will establish itself in the AlP has proven to be unrealistic. The City does not have a full service airport, nor sufficient housing opportunities, talent pool, and other "requirements" for such industry. The types of industrial land uses that have expressed an interest in the land are warehousinq and distribution, and they cannot afford the asking price for the land, unless they are coupled with commercial and professional office land uses. Accordingly. staff believes that the Mixed-Use designation should be applied to the entire 32 acres. 3. Page 5 of Recommended Ordinance - Section 8 . . . . . . Restore this section as section nine within the text. Staff supports this recommendation. Page 8 of Recommended Ordinance - No. 2 1 General Requirements Change the 4/5 figure in the second paragraph to 80% (consistent with % in first paragraph). Staff supports this recommendation. Page 11 of Recommended Ordinance - Purpose Insert an additional sentence after the first sentence to read, ~The~;square~footaae:of ~ixed~use Staff is supportive of this recommendation provided additional language is added that would allow for a deviation from the percentage standard if a findinq is made that the site planning and architecture are exemplary and exceed the minimum requirements. Staff's suggested language is as follows: ~:DeviatiOn' from :.the :!~ ~b: ~: pb'r~ntage requirement maybe ;a pp~ov~d through :th ed iS cretion a w ireview proce'ss~;if,iafindin~';i~m:adei~tha:t~the~'.;sit~':i~lanni~g::iand archit~'ct~f'e;;iare: ~:em:plaW and exceed ;the minim u m req~irem~:~tS;~;~hd th:~t t h~~ pr o:p:OS~d ~i:~ ~f :la nd as~::~b~ta~nfi~'lly bbnform s to the: spidt and intent; of the Mi~ed;US~: la'nd use desiqnatioh:~ Page 14 of Recommended Ordinance - Permitted Uses Expand Item "b" to read, "Child day-care facility forserving ;employeeswithinthe ALP." Staff supports this recommendation. Page '16 of Recommended Ordinance - Maximum Lot Coverage Delete the last sentence, and add a new sentence to read, "lnda'~trial~!~la'hd;~uses ;may cover, a Staff supports this recommendation. Page 22 of Recommended Ordinance - Item h Revise this sentence to read, "...and mature appearance can be attained in ........ ~-',, --~'----' Q I gQo~./I IQl,,.,/I,,y gl I~,,.,/I L ...... ' "' three QIII~JUII~. Ul %1111~ ~;years Staff supports this recommendation. Page 25 of Recommended Ordinance - No. 5 - Lighting Revise Item "c" to read, "Lighting shall not be directed towards Highway 101, the Ukiah Municipal Airport, or adjacent properties, or upwards towards the sky." Staff supports this recommendation. 10. Page 25 - Circulation Plan Add a final sentence to the paragraph to read, "Property owners of parcels with frontage along the railroad dght-of-way are encouraged to plan for possible future use of the railroad." Staff supports this recommendation. 11. Page 28 - Section Twelve / Item c Revise the language in Item "c" to read, "That the use would be in harmony and consistent with the purpose and intent of the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance ~nd!gkiah Ge:heral Staff supports this recommendation. Mountanos Site Development Permit 99-15 Also at their August 25, 1999 meeting, the Planning Commission considered an actual mixed-use development project. The project consisted of approximately 4~% retail commercial, 31% industrial, and 21% professional offices. While the Commission found that the site planning and architecture far exceeded the requirements of the Planned Development Ordinance, they were concerned with the amount of retail commercial square footage and the lack of industrial square footage. They conditionally approved the project imposing a condition that the plans submitted for a building permit be consistent with the requirements of the adopted AlP Planned Development Ordinance. If the City Council does not adopt the Ordinance establishing the Mixed-Use Designation, the conditionally approved project will be unable to satisfy the condition requiring consistency with the Ordinance. Additionally, if the Council establishes the "use" percentages recommended by the Planning Commission, some redesign of the project may be necessary. However, the applicants have indicated that without the proposed 48% retail commercial component, it is unlikely that they could proceed with the project, and would end up designing a new project proposing standard utilitarian industrial buildings likely dedicated to warehousing. The Site Development Permit was formally acted on by the Planning Commission, and is not subject to the review and approval by the City Council. If the City Council accepts staffs recommendation of adding language to allow deviation from the "use" percentages provided a finding can be made that the site planning and architecture are exemplary and exceed the minimum requirements, then the Mountanos project will have to go back to the Planning Commission for this determination. While this step may seem cumbersome, it is a one time scenario resulting from the project approval being contingent upon the Council's adoption of the amended Ordinance. In the future, if the "deviation" language is included in the Ordinance, it will provide the Planning Commission important flexibility in determining the appropriate percentage of mixed-use in relation to the site planning and architecture of a given project. Airport Industrial Park Capital Improvement Program As indicated at the September 1, 1999 City Council meeting, adoption of the proposed amendments to the AlP Planned Development Ordinance would require further adjustments to the AlP Capital Improvement Program. It is anticipated that the fees for development in the new Mixed-Use area would be increased from the previous industrial standard, and that the fees on other parcels within the AlP would be reduced accordingly. Project Consistency with AlP Certified "Program" EIR Pursuant to CEQA Section 15168 (c)(4), it has been determined that the proposed Planned Development Ordinance Amendment project is consistent with the scope, findings and conclusions contained in the previously certified Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park, and therefore no additional environmental review is necessary or required. A written checklist/evaluation was prepared to document this determination, and is on file with the City Planning Department. CONCLUSIONS. Staff is initiating a number of amendments to the existing Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance. The amendments are intended to create opportunity for a compatible mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses in a 32 acre portion of the AlP that is currently designated for industdal uses only. While it may reduce the overall amount of future industdal development within the AlP, the mixed-use approach provides more opportunity for increased architectural and site planning excellence. Additionally, it is proposed that ancillary commercial opportunities be provided for in the "Professional Office" land use designation which theoretically promotes the concept of reducing the dependency of the automobile by providing opportunity for places of employment to be located adjacent to small eateries, child care facilities, banks, and small retail shops. Other amendments are proposed that would improve the aesthetics of development within the AlP, ensure compliance with the provisions of the Airport Master Plan, and "clean-up" antiquated or obsolete language. Staff is able to conclude that the proposed amendments create a more dynamic and realistic set of regulations for the growth and development of the AlP. The Planning Commission is recommending adoption of the Ordinance with two key changes that would reduce the amount of land redesignated to "Mixed-Use", and establish minimum and maximum percentages of development dedicated to industrial and commercial land uses. Staff is not supportive of reducing the amount of "Mixed-Use" acreage from 32 to 15 acres, because the types of industrial land uses that are interested in locating in the park cannot afford do so without the ability to "share" the property with commercial and professional office land uses. Staff is supportive of establishing use percentages within the designation, provided that language is added that would allow a deviation from the use percentages if it is concluded that the project represents a superior site planning and architectural effort, such as the Mountanos SDP 99-15 project. Staff is recommending that the City Council introduce with Ordinance amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development with the modifications listed above. CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT DALE: 9A August 25, 1999 DATE: August 25, 1999 TO' City of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance Amendment ! PROJECT SUMMARY: Staff is initiating an amendment to the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planned Development Ordinance that would redesignate approximately 32 acres of pure industrial land to a "mixed-use" land use designation. The new Mixed-Use concept would allow or permit a mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses. The provisions are structured such that a pure industrial land use would still be allowed, but any professional office or commercial land use proposals must contain viable industrial components. This preserves the opportunity for the industrial land uses that have always been contemplated for this acreage, but provides for a mix of supporting land uses. Staff believes that this particular mixed-use concept has merit within the AlP, because it would help fulfill the goal of creating a more sustainable community within the industrial park by providing opportunity for a wider variety of land uses that are supportive of industrial development. Additionally, while it may reduce the overall amount of future industrial development within the AlP, it provides more opportunity for increased architectural and site planning excellence. Additional amendments to the Ordinance are proposed, and are described in the Project Description section of this report. This project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners to visit the site prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council. PROJECT LOCATION: The Airport Industrial Park is located in the southeastern portion of the City, south of Talmage Road, west of Highway 101, east of the NWP railroad tracks, and northeast of Norgard Lane. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council ADOPTION of the proposed revisions to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: Pursuant to CEQA Section 15168 (c)(4), it has been determined that the proposed Planned Development Ordinance Amendment project is consistent with the scope, findings and conclusions contained in the previously certified Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park, and therefore no additional environmental review is necessary or required. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: GP: Master Plan Area / Zoning: PD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed revisions to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance include creating a "Mixed-Use" land use designation and applying it to approximately 32 acres along the west side of Airport Park Boulevard, south of Commerce Ddve. Also, staff is proposing to add a "Purpose" section to the Professional Office land use designation, and permitting small retail commercial opportunities with the securing of a Use Permit. Additionally, a number of minor amendments are proposed such as adding language requiring all development to be in compliance with the provisions of the URiah Airport Master Plan; reducing the maximum lot coverage from 45 percent to a more realistic 40 percent; increasing the setback from Highway 101 from 40 feet to 60 feet; revising the landscaping requirements to be consistent with the newly adopted provisions of the URiah Municipal Code; and other minor language changes. BACKGROUND: During the spring of 1999, a property owner in the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) approached the City about constructing a mixed-use development on his property. The uses included a compatible mix of light industrial, professional office, and retail commercial. The current Planned Development Ordinance for the AlP is conventional in n~ture and it does not allow or permit such a mix of land uses. Detailed intemal discussions among various staff members resulted in the development of a number of options for the landowner. First, the land owner could file an application proposing to revise the AlP Planned Development Ordinance to create a mixed-use land use category, and to reclassify his parcel to the new mixed-use designation. This option, if approved, would result in a single parcel with a mixed-use designation surrounded by parcels designated "Industrial." This result could be construed as "spot" zoning, and would not achieve the City's goal of logical and orderly development within the AlP. Second, the property owner could propose to amend the allowed and permitted uses within the "Industrial" land use designation affecting the subject parcel. This would involve adding professional offices and retail commercial activities as permitted uses. The result of this approach would be a diluting of the "Industrial" designation, and an open door to potentially commercializing the entire remaining acreage solely devoted to industrial land uses. Third, the City could assume a lead role and create a mixed-use classification for a broader area that would provide for a compatible mix of land uses. If carefully designed, the mixed-use designation would provide opportunity for industrial, professional office, and retail commercial land uses if "master planned" for a particular property. Staff concluded that the broader application of a mixed-use designation would fulfill the General Plan's direction for a "Master Plan Area" for the AlP, and would provide the necessary tool for ensudng logical and ordedy development. In addition, it would provide more flexibility to property owners to develop their parcels in response to market conditions and local needs. It would also provide opportunity for a certain eclecticism in uses, site planning and architecture that would preclude an uninteresting collection of monotonous and dull developments in the subject area. Finally, it would help fulfill the 9oal of creating a more sustainable community within the AlP by providing compatible commercial services in close proximity to places of employment. THE MIXED-USE CONCEPT: As noted above, the mixed-use designation would provide opportunity for industrial, professional office, and retail commercial land uses if "master planned" for a particular property. The recommended Ordinance revisions require that any proposal for development within the affected area must include an industrial component. Professional offices and/or commercial land uses could be included in the development proposal provided the site plannin9 and design ensure compatibility between the uses. STAFF ANALYSIS: The following analysis is segregated into categories which capture the proposed amendments. Mixed-Use Designation: The proposed Mixed-Use land use designation has been created to reflect a more modern approach to planning for development in the Airport Industrial Park. It is intended to provide for industrial and manufacturing land uses that would be supported by compatible eateries, child care facilities, branch banking facilities, and retail shops. It is not intended to be a downtown type mixed-use strategy where residential opportunities are encouraged above office and commercial space below. Staff does not favor this approach for the AlP, because of the desired opportunities for industrial land uses, which have the potential to conflict with residential uses. Perhaps more important, is the need to preserve and enhance the downtown as the City's true downtown. The vision for the AlP has always included industrial land uses as the pdmary focus. Admittedly, the commercial component, while controversial, has been exp~nded in the recent past to allow or permit retail commercial activities, as well as opportunities for automotive commercial land uses. While the automotive commercial opportunities are situated within the Industrial/Automotive Commercial land use category, there has been a reduction of pure industrial land use acreage over the past seven years. Market conditions have been steady for commercial land uses, while virtually non-existent for industrial land uses. In response to concerns about a lack of flexibility in the Industrial land use category for assembling a number of different but compatible land uses, staff is proposing the "mixed-Use" designation for approximately 32 acres. Similar to the Industrial/Automotive Commercial land use designation, the underlying allowed land use in the Mixed-Use designation is industrial. In fact, included in the text, is a requirement that each development proposal must contain a viable industrial component. All proposed mixed-use development projects within the 32 acres will be scrutinized in the discretionary review process for site planning and architectural excellence, as well as for the compatibility of land uses. Professional Office Designation: Staff is proposing two changes to the Professional Office land use designation. First, we are suggesting that "small retail commercial stores and shops" be added as a permitted land use requiring the securing of a Use Permit. This will provide the opportunity for uses ancillary to, and compatible with professional offices, and promote the concept of working, eating, and shopping in virtually the same location. Theoretically, this will reduce the use of the automobile during the noon peak hour, and provide an eclectic, yet compatible assemblage of uses. Second, staff is proposing to add a "Purpose" section to define the intent of the land use category, particularly in light of the proposed addition of small retail commercial opportunities as permitted land uses. The "Purpose" section clearly states that the non-professional office land uses are to be ancillary components to professional office development projects. General requirements include a size threshold for the commercial components of projects that ensure their ancillary relationship to the primary professional office uses. Specifically, the regulations do not allow child care facilities, delicatessens, and small commercial retail stores and shops to exceed 20 percent of the total developable square footage of any one parcel. Moreover, the regulations require that the resulting square footage that comprises the 20 percent can only be developed with individual store/shop spaces that do not exceed a maximum 2,000 square feet in size. Airport Master Plan: The current Ordinance requires development proposals to comply with the FAA side slope cdteda, but is silent regarding other requirements of the Ukiah Airport Master Plan. Accordingly, staff is recommending language that requires all development to comply with the provisions of the Ukiah Airport Master Plan. Lot Coverage: As development has occurred in the AlP, staff has tracked the resulting lot coverage of various projects. To date, none of the projects have come close to approaching the 45 percent maximum coverage standard. While this standard was originally designed for industrial projects and is therefore not theoretically germaine to the recent commercial development, it is staff's impression that the 45 percent standard is still too high and unrealistic, even for industrial developments. Accordingly, we are proposing that it be reduced to 40 percent, which matches the standard for the "Mixed-Use" classification, and seems more appropriate when balanced with the standards for parking and landscaping. f · Hiqhway Setback: Staff is recommending that the 40 foot setback requirement from the property line along Highway 101 be increased to 60 feet. The existing Friedman Brothers home improvement building is setback 50 feet, and it is staff's opinion that even with the landscaping treatments, it is too close, and appears to loom over the highway. The proposed 60 foot setback seems not only reasonable, but certainly feasible. Landscaping: Staff is proposing to make the landscaping requirements for development projects within the AlP consistent with those for projects proposed in the conventional zoning districts elsewhere in the City. The Planning Commission and City Council have endorsed new landscaping requirements and included them in recently adopted Zoning Code text revisions, and staff believes that they should be applied equally to the AlP. These standards are not onerous to businesses, and in fact, it appears that the existing developments within the AlP generally comply. CONCLUSIONS: Staff is initiating a number of amendments to the existing Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance. The amendments are intended to create opportunity for a compatible mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses in a 32 acre portion of the AlP that is currently designated for industrial uses only. While it may reduce the overall amount of future industrial development within the AlP, the mixed-use approach provides more opportunity for increased architectural and site planning excellence. Additionally, it is proposed that ancillary commercial opportunities be provided for in the "Professional Office" land use designation which theoretically promotes the concept of reducing the dependency of the automobile by providing opportunity for places of employment to be located adjacent to small eateries, child care facilities, banks, and small retail shops. Other amendments are proposed that would improve the aesthetics of development within the AlP, ensure compliance with the provisions of the Airport Master Plan, and "clean-up" antiquated or obsolete language. Staff is able to conclude that the proposed amendments create a more dynamic and realistic set of regulations for the growth and development of the AlP. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft revisions to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: Bob Sawyer, Pi~hning Director MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION August 25, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT Judy Pruden, Chairman Eric Larson Mike Correll Joe Chiles Jennifer Puser OTHERS PRESENT Richard Ruff John McCowen Marge Giuntoli Dave Downey STAFF PRESENT Chadie Stump, Senior Planner Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Catherine L. Elawadly, Recording Secretary MEMBERS ABSENT None The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Pruden at 7:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION Chairman Pruden polled the Planning Commission and determined each had made the required site visits. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Regular Meeting of August 11, 1999 Commissioner Correll recommended the following addition to the minutes: Page 7, "Mr. Correll inquired regarding additional landscaping and whether certain mature "specimen" trees would be feasible to plant as opposed to planting a particular species of young trees," amended to read: "Mr. Correll inquired regarding additional landscaping and whether certain mature "Balled and Burlaped" trees would be feasible to plant as opposed to planting a particular species of young trees." Chairman Pruden recommended the following sentence be stricken from the minutes: Page 11, "Chairman Pruden stated as opposed to the smaller building plan, the larger plan more clearly presents and/or identifies certain pertinent aspects of the building design." Chairman Pruden recommended the following additions to the minutes: Page 11, "Ms. Pruden inquired whether the oriental shrubs entitled "Photinia" and/or "Red Robin" MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page I August 25, 1999 located on the south side of the fence or the north side of the street belong to the City of Ukiah," amended to read: "Ms. Pruden inquired whether the ornamental shrubs entitled "Photinia" and/or "Red Robin" located on the south side of the fence or the north side of the street belong to the City of Ukiah." Page 13, "Ms. Pruden recommended from a historical note, the area was formerly a Red Prune Orchard and placement of a Red Prune tree may be appropriate, "amended to read: "Ms. Pruden recommended from a historical note, the area was formedy a Prune Orchard and placement of Red Plum trees may be appropriate." ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by an all AYE vote of the Commissioners present to approve the minutes of August 11,1999, as amended. e COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEM~ · No one from the audience came forward. 6. APPEAL PROCES.~ Chairman Pruden read the appeal process to the audience. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is September 7, 1999. 7. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN It was the consensus of the Commissioners to elect the Chairman and Vice Chairman after the Project Review hearings. 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICF Staff reported Major Site Development Permit No. 99-15 was legally noticed in accordance with the provisions as outlined in the City Municipal Code. 9. PROJECT REVIEW: 9A. Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planned Development Ordinance Amendment, as filed by _the City Planning Depariment to create a "Mixed-Use" land use designation in the AlP .The Mixed-Use designation would provide opportunity for industrial, professiona office, and retail commercial land uses for the parcels affected by the designation The proposed Mixed-Use designation would affect approximately 32 acres in the AlP, generally described as being the parcels of, land situated west of Ai¢i~ort Par.[_ Boulevard, south of Commerce Drive (Hastings), and north of the existing brewery parcel (Assessor's Parcel Nos. 180-080-16, 19, 22, 25,26,27,28,29, and 30 and a portion of 180-110-06). It was noted the above-referenced project is quasi-legislative in nature and does not require City Planning Commissioners to visit the site prior to formulating a recommendation to the City Council. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 August 25, 1999 It was noted the proposed Ordinance amendments are intended to create opportunity for a compatible mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses in a 32 acre portion of the Airport Industrial Park (ALP), which is currently designated for industrial uses only. Senior Planner Stump reviewed the Staff report and reported the Planning Department supporting a Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the proposed revisions to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance to include creating a "Mixed-Use" land use designation and applying it to approximately 32 acres along the west side of Airport Park Boulevard, south of Commerce Drive. These proposed revisions are addressed in Staffs analysis with reference to such categories as Mixed-use designation, Professional Office Designation, compliance with the Airport Master Plan, Lot Coverage, Highway Setback, and Landscaping. Mr. Stump stated the new "Mixed-Use" concept would "allow or permit" a mix of industrial, office, and commercial land uses. The provisions are structured so ,that "pure" industrial land use would still be allowed, but any professional office or retail/commercial land use proposals must contain "viable" industrial components. He stated Staff added a "Purpose" section to the "Professional Office" land use designation, permitting small retail/commercial opportunities with the securement of a Use Permit. He noted the revised language is in compliance with the Ukiah Airport Master Plan and language consistent with the Ukiah General Plan regarding maximum lot coverage reduction from a forty-five percent (45%) to a forty percent (40%) lot coverage standard. The revised language also includes an increased Highway 101 setback from 40 feet to 60 feet. He further noted the proposed revisions to the AlP landscaping requirements are consistent with the newly adopted provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code. He stated the AlP Ordinance has been in effect for some time and governs the growth and development of the Airport Industrial Park. This Ordinance has undergone many amendments over the years. The "Professional Office" designation category as provided for under the "Purpose" section, allows small retail/commercial shops and stores to be added as permitted land uses, which will create the opportunity for uses ancillary to, and compatible with professional offices. This "Purpose" section definition promotes the concept of working, eating, and shopping in the same location. Additionally, this section clearly states non-professional office land uses are to be ancillary components of professional office development projects. Specific regulations do no allow child care facilities, delicatessens, and small commercial retail stores and shops to exceed twenty percent (20 percent) of the total development square footage of any one parcel. The resulting square footage, comprising the 20 percent, can only be developed with individual store/shop spaces not to exceed a maximum 2,000 square feet in size. Mr. Stump reported the proposed revised AlP Ordinance would require all developmental projects to be consistent with the Airport Master Plan. He further reported the Ordinance revisions are intended to not only provide for industrial and manufacturing land uses, but support a "Mixed-Use" designation strategy wherein compatible eateries, child care facilities, branch banking facilities, and retail shops would be available. This"Mixed-Use" strategy does not include residential opportunities which have the potential to conflict with the opportunities for industrial land uses. He stated, in Staffs opinion, the proposed "Mixed-Use" designation would provide a better opportunity for improved architecture and site development as opposed to "straight" industrial projects. In the proposed "Mixed-Use" designation, industrial use can still be the dominate land use. The industrial uses are considered "allowed uses" as opposed to professional offices and retail/commercial land uses, which are considered "permitted uses" with the securement of a Use MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 August 25, 1999 Permit. It was noted the proposed amendments would be reviewed by the Commissioners on a page by page basis. Planning Commission Questions and/or Concerns with the Proposed AlP PD Ordinance Amendments: Chairman Pruden inquired regarding the lot coverage for the C-1 Zoning District. Mr. Stump replied the lot coverage for the C-1 Zoning District is forty percent (40%), which is the Ukiah General Plan's requirement for commercial designation. Commissioner Puser inquired with reference to the Staff report, "There is a requirement that each development proposal must contain a viable industrial compohent," and whether a percentage ratio was considered for each individual proposed land use designation. Mr. Stump replied there is no standard land use designation percentage included in the revised Ordinance language, but Staff considered a "three-way split" concept between the industrial, professional office, and retail/commercial land use designations. He further replied the revised language does include provisions allowing a particular project requiring vacant land, which does not have an industrial component, to proceed with the professional office and retail/commercial land uses, provided such a project reserve a third of the property for industrial land uses, perlot. Ms. Pruden drew attention to the 32 acres adjacent to the NWP Railroad tracks. She stated a discussion is necessary with reference to "a component" incorporating the Railroad after Railroad repairs are made and the freight operation is back online. She stated there exists the possibility of a future Railroad freight and passenger service. She further stated it is important for a discussion regarding the Railroad being a potential form of transportation and whether the Planning Department should require such consideration when a lot is developed. Mr. Stump replied affirmatively. He stated Planning staff originally envisioned the AlP as an industrial park due to its location in proximity to the existing Railroad, Airport, and U. S. Highway 101. He also stated it is the Planning Department's desire to encourage any project, encompassing an industrial component envisioning railroad service, to consider direct railroad access. He further stated a project requirement within the Ordinance to provide direct access to the Railroad or to develop a facility, which would accommodate railroad usage, may be difficult, and perhaps inappropriate. Commissioner Chiles inquired with reference to the "vague" rear setback language and whether incorporation of additional narrative language as a planning factor was necessary. Mr. Stump replied a statement addressing the above-referenced concerns can be incorporated in the Ordinance sections pertaining to "general requirements, intent, and/or purpose." Commissioner Puser proposed the Commission discuss allowance of more "professional offices" in the industrial zoned AlP area, as opposed to preservation of the "professional offices" to the downtown area. She stated she is not opposed to the "Mixed-Use" designation in the AlP, but she MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 August 25, 1999 is concemed with the "Professional Office" concept and proposes further discussion in this regard. Mr. Stump replied it is the Planning Department's intention not to encourage or create a "new downtown" theme, which is complex when applying the proposed concept of "Mixed-Use" in an industrially zoned area. He also replied Staff would not support "Mixed-Use" designation further up Commerce Drive, if the "Mixed-Use" project includes an industrial component. Commissioner Correll expressed his concern regarding ingress and egress and traffic issues within the AlP. He also proposed discussion regarding the possibility for development of a south bound freeway on-ramp, as well as the development of loading docks or the use of one AlP parcel as a "mini station or stop-off point" for the AlP as development progresses. Mr. Stump reported, as background information, there is an existing Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Airport Industrial Park buildout and the Planning Department relies on this Report to ensure a proposed Planned Development Ordinanc~ Amendment project is in compliance with all requirements outlined in this Report. It was noted there should be a southern access point to the AlP as referenced in the EIR findings and conclusions. It was also noted the City envisioned an Airport Road extension to Norgard Lane, but according to the EIR, a "major" sound wall development would be required. It was further noted the noise from traffic in this area would heavily impact the neighborhood. Mr. Stump stated the City Council, when certifying the EIR, did not feel the Norgard Lane access would be a good idea. He stated this southern or third access was not considered for traffic circulation, but for emergency vehicle access issues. Alternatively, a proposed third access would come from the Airport property onto Airport Road and this access would contain a locked gate. The proposed access, according to the City Fire and Police Department, would be required when the AlP reaches 50 percent buildout. It was noted a City supplemental traffic circulation study was completed in connection with the above-referenced third access matter and the "Mixed-Use" proposal. The study concluded the AlP could accommodate increased traffic in terms of traffic and circulation impacts with the current mitigation program. Commissioner Larson commented although the page by page review of the revised Ordinance is appropriate, other matters out of the context of the page by page review, referencing "Mixed-Use" percentage ratios, also require discussion. He stated he would like to "revisit" the ban on residential uses in the AlP. He also stated he would like to discuss the "industrial potential" for the AlP as well as discuss the architectural standards for highway visibility. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7.14 p;m. It was noted the proposed revised amendment demonstrates language to be deleted and/or added wherein the Commissioners have the opportunity to critique the individual sections and make specific recommendations to Staff. It was also noted all Ordinance section numbering will be revised by Staff to reflect any deletions and/or additions. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 August 25, 1999 Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance Amendment discussion and recommendations: _Page 1, Sections 1 & 2: No change will be made to the face page referencing the "purpose" of Mixed-Use." A statement regarding railroad access would be added but not to the face page of the amendment. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to change the name of the new designation from "Mixed-Use to "Industrial Mixed-Use." It was noted "Industrial Mixed-Use" terminology would be consistently applied throughout the document. Page 2, Section 3: The AlP "Industrial use" shall remain as the allowed use. Staff stated should AlP properties buildout be "pure" industrial, this would be consistent with the AlP Ordinance and with the Ukiah General Plan. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 3: No changes and/or recommendations. Page 4: Mixed-Use, Item 6 __ It was noted during the Commission's discussion, Staff's original "Mixed-Use" proposal, currently designated industrial and proceeding southerly, included parcels, 16,25,26,19, 22,27,28,29, and 30, which encompasses 32 acres. It was the Planning Commission's recommendation to draw the "Mixed-Use" boundary line at the southern line parcel, 27 (Mountanos). The revised "Mixed-Use" with reference to the proposed amendment, would include parcels 25, 26,19, 22, 27, which encompasses approximately 15 acres. Parcels 28, 29, and 30 would remain industrial zoned. It was noted Planning Staff will incorporate the newly adjusted "Mixed-Use" boundary lines into the AlP PD Ordinance Amendments as an alternative for the City Council. Page 5: It was the consensus of the Commissioners to recommend Section eight not be deleted from the text. It was noted Lot Coverage with reference to Industrial and Commercial zoned districts would remain at 40 percent for the entire AlP. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 August 25, 1999 Commissioner Larson stated with reference to the "pure" Industrial zoning section, a 45 percent lot coverage is also acceptable even though the 40 percent lot coverage ratio is the standard ratio with reference to the Ukiah General Plan. Staff noted the Ukiah General Plan incorporates a 40 percent lot coverage for commercial land uses and does not specify for industrial land uses. Staff supported the recommended lot coverage increase of 5 percent with reference to industrial land uses. Page 6_.' No changes and/or recommendations. Page 7. Professional Office Designation: Chairman Pruden commented there has been previous Planning Department discussion whether to allow living quarters as "Mixed-Use" in the AlP, which did not survive the City Council process. She purported "under new the design standards and the shift in how people make a living," it may be beneficial to incorporate an office/living quarter combination in the "Professional Office" designation. She stated the "Professional Office" designation is not the place for "Section Eight" housing or the place for the congregation of a lot of children. Mr. Stump stated Staff has no objection regarding the creation of residential land use opportunities within the AlP, but, at the same time, Staff does not want to encourage a "downtown" in this area. It was noted residential land use may be a possibility in the AlP provided there is strict criteria with regard to the residential land use objectives. Commissioner Puser stated her concern with reference to the concept of "Professional Office," allowed uses, acts as a potential deterrence from the downtown. She further stated, in her opinion, "Professional Office" uses are more appropriate in the downtown. She reiterated she is inclined to favor expansion of the Industrial Mixed Use. She stated the people utilizing the "Professional Office" use designation would be ddving thero and would not be the people working in the AlP. She further stated she does not support promoting "Professional Office" use designation in the AlP when thero is plenty of vacant office space available in the downtown. Ms. Pruden stated she does not think the City can limit what professions can or cannot exist in the AlP. Ms. Puser stated, in her opinion, industrial and related retail uses are appropriate in the AlP, but "Professional Offices" uses are not. She recommended the AIP's west side be entirely "Industrial Mixed Use" and for the "Professional Office" designation to be changed to "Industrial Mixed Use," The aforementioned recommendation would result in the types of retail/commercial uses to meet the needs of the people working in this area without the "Professional Office" space, which is available downtown. She does not advocate limiting what businesses should or should not be allowed in the AlP. Mr. Larson commented it was eminent the proposed revised Ordinance would prompt controversial mixed land use discussion. He stated with regard to the "Mixed-Use" land desic]nafinn = element is the traffic impact, which would e hmlted, s~nce people would not have to leave the AlP b .... ' .... , .~ key MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 August 25. 1999 for lunch or for certain other services. He further stated with the lack of the housing element, the mixed land use does not affect the significant high volume traffic commute time. Although the mixed land use would promote reduced automobile use, there is still the one hour during the day when traffic is heavy. He further stated, here is a certain "life style" promotion of living, working, and socializing with regard to mixed-use development. He noted dictation of specific land uses as well as the barring of certain professions would not be appropriate. It was also noted such above- referenced action would not benefit the major proponents, which consist of the property owners, potential applicants and architects. Mr. Larson inquired whether it would be acceptable to add Iow impact industrial uses as a "permitted" activity in the "Professional Office" zoning. Mr. Stump replied with reference to major land use designation changes, there would be consistency issues associated with the EIR. He further replied it is questionable how traffic mitigation issues would be handled, should the "Profession-al Office" land use designation be eliminated and compensated by additional industrial and commercial opportunities. Staff cautioned against making major land use designation changes for this reason. Ms. Puser stated she does not have a problem regarding "Mixed-Use" with reference to the 32 acres. She also stated other portions in the AlP warrant discussion. She further stated the argument supporting "Mixed-Use" is for the AlP to be a "sustainable" place wherein "Professional Office" use opportunities should not be a part. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 8: Chairman Pruden inquired regarding Staff's language interpretation of, "All proposed development projects within the Professional Office designation must include a viable office development component," as referenced in the "Professional Office Designation, General Requirements. Mr. Stump replied "viable office development" means within the "Professional Office" land use designation, all projects must have must be some "Professional Office" square footage. He stated the "Professional Office" component must be viable or a "real" office component. It was noted with reference to the term "viable" all potential "Professional Office" projects must be legitimate professional offices. Commissioner Larson drew attention to the language, "a small commercial or retail commercial project, may proceed without a "Professional Office" component if a minimum of 415 or 80 percent of the acreage of the parcel is set aside for future "Professional Office" development." He stated, in other words, a small commercial or retail commercial project which represents 20 percent or less of the land use coverage can proceed with the remaining 80 percent to be set aside for "Professional Office" development. Mr. Stump cladfied the above-referenced language by stating hypothetically, if land is vacant and an applicant desires to establish a "Professional Office" development without a potential tenant, but an existing commercial/retail component as well as other "allowed" or "permitted" uses in connection with the project are present, Staff would support such a project provided applicant set aside a MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 August25,1999 certain portion of the acreage for future "Professional Office" land development. Mr. Stump continued to clarify the language, "Adequate on-site circulation and parking to serve the future "Professional Office" component must be provided, and the configuration of the land dedicated to a future "Professional Office" component must be logically and genuinely planned for such use." He stated this intent hypothetically includes, development of a commercial/retail project, wherein an applicant must prove to the Planning Department, as evidenced on the Site Plans, that he/she will set aside a certain amount of acreage as articulated above, for "Professional Office" development. The Site Plan must also address parking and traffic circulations issues and/or concerns which include the "Professional Office" component. He further continued to clarify the language, "a project with only a professional office component is consistent with, and allowed in the professional office designation." He stated, in other words, a "pure" professional office is acceptable. ! · He noted Staff's intention with regard to the general requirements of the "Professional Office" land use designation is to allow for some land use diversity and flexibility within the "Professional Office" category. He further noted Staff does not favor a buildout of professional office buildings on the acreage north of Commerce Drive and west of Airport Park Boulevard. Staff supports professional office buildings in this area along with other accommodating small retail/commercial uses. It was noted the exiting roads in the Park are not City owned or maintained. A general discussion followed regarding sidewalks and crosswalks. It was noted if the purpose of the revised Ordinance is for people who work in the Park to utilize the services within, then stop signs and crosswalks are necessary. Generally, the Commissioners favored the purpose section of the "Professional Office" land use designation even though it is not likely an applicant would develop only 1/5 of a parcel and leave the remaining 4/5 temporarily vacant. Ms. Pruden drew attention to the "purpose" language contained in "Professional Office" land use designation pertaining to the 20 percent use coverage wherein she stated it is difficult for readers to concentrate on the implied 80 percent use coverage. She proposed a language be crafted to the Ordinance amendments to include an editorial change with reference to the 4/5 or 80 percent so the 80/20 land use concept is understood. It was later suggested by the Commissioners to continue the discussion of "Professional Office" to a later Planning Commission hearing. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to change the 415 figure in section 2, General Requirements, second paragraph to 80% to be consistent with percentage figure used in the preceding paragraph. Page 9: Professional Office Designation, Permitted Uses, Section 3c: MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 August 25, 1999 It was noted by Staff Gary Akerstrom, the appointed Redwood Business Park representative, was concerned that limiting the stores and shops to a 2,000 square feet maximum was considered "a little bit" small. It was also noted by Staff "relief language" can be articulated, at the Commission's discretion, with regard to the 2,000 square feet maximum standard without implementing a vadance since a vadance is associated with development standards such as setbacks and height. It was noted there are plenty of opportunities within the Park should a project need more than 2,000 square feet. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 10: No changes and/or recommendations. ,Pages 11 & 12: Industrial/Automotive Commercial Designation, Permitted Use, Section 2e Commissioner Larson inquired why this section referencing automobile dealerships does not include automobile rental kiosk type operation as an ancillary use. Mr. Stump replied Staff's intent with regard to this section was to articulate "those" types of uses which would synergize with automobile dealerships, but not necessarily be a part of a dealership. He further replied a car rental kiosk type operation would be a part of the automobile dealership. The ancillary use would then be "allowed." Mr. Larson stated if an automobile dealership, as part of its business, allows car rentals, would this matter be "implied." Mr. Stump replied if an automobile dealership came forward with a rental component, this would be a "permitted" use and an applicant could pursue a "Use Permit" in this land designation. Mixed-use, Designation, Purpose & General Requirements Section 2: Commissioner Larson inquired if a professional office or retail commercial project, or a combination of the two, could proceed without an industrial component if a minimum of 1/3 of the rear acreage of the parcel is set aside for future industrial development, and whether this language reflects a potential non-industrial use project. He stated the aforementioned language is the only indication he had of any kind of percentage allotment of use in order to justify the entire notion of "Mixed-Use" designation. Mr. Stump replied affirmatively. Mr. Stump replied Staff is not opposed to placing a percentage into the Ordinance which would be consistent with the 1/3 standard for the vacant land or one that does not include an industrial component. He further replied Staff would not be opposed if the Planning Commission felt MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 August 25, 1999 compelled to recommend the City Council adopt a 331/3 percent industrial component standard. He stated he supported placement of a percentage pertaining to use allotment. Mr. Larson noted previously the industrial land across the street from the subject 32 acres of "pure" industrial land was converted to "automotive industrial" which would encompass automobile dealerships, and the likelihood of industrial activity in this area is minimal, at best. He also noted 300,000 feet of potential industrial space was lost with the above-referenced change. He further noted the subject 32 acres encompassing 464,000 square feet of industrial land job space would be changed. He calculated with reference to the 32 acres, a 40 percent buildout or coverage rate would total approximately 600,000 square feet. He also calculated 2/3 of this total is approximately 460,000 square feet. He reiterated with reference to the proposed Site Development Permit No. 99- 15, the industrial land use is 30 percent, the retail/commercial is 50 percent, with a remaining balance of 20 percent. The proposed Ordinance does not specify any use percentage ratio. He stated should the Commissioners recommend implementing a percentage regarding land use ratios, and depending what percentage the City Council feels is appropriate, the space set aside for industrial use will again diminish He further stated, depending on acceptable percentage ratios approved by City Council, future projects will probably follow "the pattem." He noted each time there are land use designation changes, whether it be subject to percentage ratios or an alternate form of splitting land uses, industrial land use designation will be lessened. He reported, according to studies and/or reports, this area's current revenue configurations support industrial and residential land uses, but rezoning does eliminate industrial land use, a little at a time. He noted residential land use is not allowed in the AlP. A short discussion followed regarding appropriate land use percentage ratios and what factors constitute a "Mixed-Use" balance. It was noted the variables affecting a "Mixed-Use" balance are not readily known. It was further noted changes in the economy and/or property taxes directly affect land uses. Mr. Larson stated he supports future industrial land use preservation. He stated "spot development" throughout the AlP incorporating vadous land uses, makes it difficult to retain "pure" land use or to anticipate future changes with reference to technology, economy, tax structure, and/or state govemment, which will allow the City to profitably pursue creating good job opportunities for people. The present emphasis on the retail industry does not particularly allow people, at this wage level, the opportunity to increase their standard of living. Economics greatly influence the activity in the AlP. He stated it may be necessary to apply a more complex land use formula for certain specific uses within categories, which mix very well. It was noted the Commissioners support the "Mixed-Use" proposal but are not sure how to allocate appropriately the percentage ratios for the different land uses. It was also noted the possibility of "staggering" the percentages as land development moves south to the "pure" industrial area. It was further noted allocating percentage ratios for land uses directly affects land values. Industrial development in the AlP has not been successful because land is too expensive. One of the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 August 25, 1999 motivations for the proposed consideration of mixed land use is the necessity of justifying raw land pdces. Ms. Pruden reported it was the consensus of the Commissioners AlP "Mixed-Use" is an appropriate designation, and the Commissioners agree the stated "Purpose" is acceptable. She also reported with regard to the Ordinance discussion above, the General Requirements are "not fully settled in" with the Commissioners. John McCowen, Ukiah, CA, stated with reference to the Ordinance discussion above regarding change in land use designation, there exists the possibility of elimination for industrial development in the AlP. He stated, as a result, there exists the need to retrofit the appropriate infrastructure toward a commercial shopping center development. He noted there will be increased traffic in the Park as people circulate in the area to shop and to conduct other business. He further noted the original infrastructure was designed to support a business park wherein there would be limited numbers of people coming and going. He reiterated most of~vhat is already allowed in the office designations would be included with the proposed Ordinance changes, and be acceptable and/or applicable in the "Mixed-Use" area. In other words, what uses are proposed in the "Mixed-Use" area would also be applicable to the office area. He drew attention to the 20 percent limitation within the office area, wherein no more than 20 percent can be utilized for office use. He further drew attention to "Mixed-Use" wherein 2/3 land use can be devoted to something other than industrial use. He stated Major Site Development No. 99-15, propose 28,000 square feet of warehouse and 51,500 square feet of commercial and professional office use, which further reduces industrial land development in this area. He further stated the existing infrastructure does not adequately provide for roads, sidewalks, and/or crosswalks. He noted the Park area as well as access from residential areas to the Park has been poorly planned. He stated he favored Commissioner Correll's recommendation to limit the acreage. This limitation would be drawn at the southern boundary of the proposed applicant's property for the purpose of some industrial development preservation. A general discussion followed with regard to the 20 percent "Professional Office" limitation, and should the Commission decide not to include any industrial development, then a 1/3 must be set aside toward a later determination. The discussion revealed there would be no guarantee the 1/3 would be developed as industrial. It was noted should the prerequisite be 80 percent for "Professional Office," then it follows 50 percent should be allotted for industrial use in the industrial area, which would preserve the chance for industrial development. Mr. Stump clarified the traffic study for the AlP area showed there would be an increase in traffic for this area, but the existing traffic mitigation program which currently collects the development impact fees would handle the additional traffic. He stated, in other words, the improvements required for buildout in the Park would accommodate the increased traffic, which would occur as a result of the aforementioned proposal. Mr. Larson inquired whether traffic impact fees would be accessed on the basis of proposed square footage of various uses. Mr. Stump replied the Public Works Department handles the formula and/or resolution which was adopted by City Council and is "broken down" according to the individual land uses. The commercial land uses pay considerably than industrial land uses. Mr. Larson stated on an individual project basis, should the uses be a three-way split (30/30/30 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 August 25, 1999 percent), then the impact fees would be proportionately assessed in each category,. Mr. Stump reported the current Resolution, provided the Ordinance Amendment is approved by City Council, would require a Capital Improvement Program amendment to support a "Mixed-Use" scenario. a discussion continued with reference to appropriate "Mixed-Use" percentage ratios as to whether Industrial land use and "Professional Office" and/or Retail/Commercial Use be construed at 80~20 or 70130 percent. It was noted a reciprocal, in terms of "Mixed-Use," incorporating a lower percentage for industrial use would make it necessary to adhere to a higher "Professional Office" percentage in order to offset the Retail/Commercial land use. It was further noted the intent is to compdse a percentage combination which would attract a true "Mixed-Use" project to come forward. It was also the Commissioners' intention to preserve industrial land use wherein it would be necessary to limit Retail/Commercial percentage land use. ! · Commissioner Larson stated he views the Retail/Commercial use as the dominate impact on the "viability" of the industrial use as opposed to the "Professional Office" use. It was his suggestion to limit the larger, major retail impacts. He stated a large retail store impacted with an industrial use would not work. He further stated the "Professional Office" has less impact and fewer restrictions. to the industrial use, and this component combination would impact a higher paying job use. He noted the reason for Industrial land use preservation is for "industrial paying jobs." He further noted "Professional Office" jobs pay higher as opposed to Retail/Commercial jobs. He stated it is his intent to limit the Retail/Commercial potential to under 50 percent, which does not compromise the potential for 50 percent of the land to be developed industrially. He proposed a maximum square footage allocation of 35 percent for Retail/Commercial use and 35 percent minimum square footage allocation for Industrial use leaving a remaining "open" balance of 30 percent for either Industrial, "Professional Office" or a mix. It is his intention to place limitations on the Retail/Commercial and minimum percentage use on the Industrial. He stated the land use percentages of 35~35~30 would discourage a person from purchasing a parcel mainly for a Retail/Commercial venture and it preserves a significant amount of Industrial land. He further stated the proposed percentage would influence the type of Retail/Commercial attracted to the area because the purchaser would have to consider a significant industrial component. He stated, the "Professional Office" use, would be a mix which would serve or relate to office, industrial or ancillary uses. Another example, would entail a 35 percent Retail/Commercial and 65 percent industrial or roughly 1/3,1/3,1/3 split. Mr. Stump drew attention with regard to the above-referenced proposed percentage ratios. The Commissioners should structure some "set relief" from those ratio standards for a future project, which is closely applicable, a project which purports a high standard of site planning/design excellence or a project that may be "a little shod" in Industrial square footage, but meets, the otherwise required percentage standard criteria could be implemented. Ms. Pruden proposed 1/3 of a project can be Retail/Commercial, which leaves 2/3 "Professional Office" and Industrial. She inquired whether this proposal would "protect the industrial component enough." a general discussion followed regarding other Cities who provide areas for "Mixed-Use" designations. It was noted in consideration, referencing fair, realistic, and reasonable land use percentages, there MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 13 August 25, 1999 is no guarantee a project would formulate to meet such set standards as discussed above. Ms. Pruden suggested the percentage ratio figures include 40 percent industrial and the other two uses 30 percent each, which would make industrial land use look predominate. Ms. Puser stated it is not the intent to have all Retail/Commercial land use. It is also not the intent with regard to the newly proposed 6 "Mixed-Use" parcels, to be all Industrial use as people would have to leave the area. The AlP Planned Development Ordinance Amendment revisions are specifically incorporated by map reference, dated September, 1999, and the individually zoned parcels include: . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Highway Commercial; Retail Commercial; , Industrial Automotive Commercial; , Industrial; Proposed "Mixed-Use" Acreage, which has been reduced from 32 acres to 15 acres; The "Professional Office" land use parcel. It was noted with reference to the AlP PD Ordinance Amendment map, other parcels may later be redefined to "Mixed-Use" to include the designated "Professional Office" area. It was further noted the Commissioners made the following proposals: . . Pruden - 40/30/30 or 40 percent Industrial, 30 percent Retail/Commercial, 30 percent Professional Office; Larson - 35/35/30, which includes Retail/Commercial and Industrial components but intentionally omitted "Professional Office.~ Mr. Larson proposed leaving out the "Professional Office"' percentage allows for more flexibility and design. He stated he has no problem with 40 percent Industrial, 40 percent "Professional Office," and 20 percent Retail/Commercial. He further stated with minimums on the Industrial and maximums on the Retail/Commercial, the "Professional Office" becomes the "bargaining tool." He stated, for example, a good mix would incorporate up to 60 percent "Professional Office" provided there existed a 40 percent Industrial land use, but having no more than 35 percent Retail/Commercial. He noted "Professional Office" is not going to dominate a land use. Ms. Puser recommended 40 percent minimum on Industrial land use, which is the most important use out of the percentage ratios. Mr. Stump recommended 40 percent minimum on Industrial land use and a 30 percent maximum on Retail/Commercial with "Professional Office" considered an option. He stated if a future project desired to come in with "all IndustriaF, this would be acceptable. It was noted incorporating minimums and maximums as opposed to specific percentage allocations allows the opportunity for greater future project flexibility. It is the Commission's intent to recommend to City Council "Mixed-Use" be defined with minimums and maximums as opposed to specific percentage ratio allocation wherein they would have to MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 August 25, 1999 address the land use proportion issue. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to insert an additional sentence after the first sentence to read, "The square footage of "Mixed-Use" project shall contain a minimum of 40 percent Industrial, and a maximum of 30 percent Retail Commercial land uses. The remaining 30 percent of the square footage may be used for Professional Offices or additional industrial uses." page 13 Permitted Uses, Section b Chairman Pruden inquired whether the Commissioners were in agreement with allowed and permitted uses. , · Commissioner Correll stated he was concerned with having child care facilities in close proximity to the airport and the legalities associated with the safety issues. Ms. Pruden replied she assumes a child care facility would be within the employer context of allowing a business to have such a facility on site. She inquired whether additional language should be incorporated stating any child care facility must be in relationship to employee issues as opposed to any commercial day-care facility going to the site and setting up a business. It was noted a child care facility can be opened on the site with a "Use Permit." It was further noted the Planning Commission would be compelled to approve such a permit provided the intent was clearly defined and there was no finding to prove the facility would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare. a bdef discussion followed whether such child care facilities be linked to a primary use wherein an applicant's intent is to establish a Professional Office or Industrial use area and provide a day-care facility for its employees. The Commissioners proposed child day-care facilities language should include "child day-care facility within an existing and allowed or permitted land use, as an accessory and/or ancillary use." a brief discussion followed whether this additional language was necessary with reference to child day-care facilities. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to expand language to read, "Child day-care facility for serving employees within the ALP." Mr. Stump stated the above-referenced matter is the intent. He further stated this is the reason every proposal must be consistent with the City Airport Industrial Park Master Plan. Page 14 Item b Commissioner Larson inquired whether this section relates to Airport interfering with Airport communication or other related matters and whether this section should make some reference to the Airport Master Plan. He further inquired whether the Airport Master Plan covers electronic MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 August 25, 1999 nuisance impacts and/or safety issues. Mr. Stump replied the Airport Master Plan does cover all safety issues. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 15: item 2, Prohibited Uses or Operations Commission Chiles inquired with regard to future secondary access would some of the restrictions outlined in this section be removed. Mr. Stump replied affirmatively. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 16: Item 2, Lot Coverage Commissioner Larson inquired why underground parking facilities are calculated into the lot coverage. Mr. Stump replied the lot coverage language, "Underground parking facilities shall be calculated in the overall coverage of a lot" was not the intended language. He further replied should the Commissioners desire to incorporate industrial lot coverage to be at 45 percent, then such language should be placed in the section which reads, "no more than 45 percent (proposed to be deleted) or 40 percent of the lot shall be covered by a building or structure." Chairman Pruden stated she supports the 40 percent concept as other commercial developments in town are conditioned with regard to landscaping and creative design work. Commission Larson stated most industrial projects require less parking. He further stated all project building footprints and parking lot areas are all part of the human imprint on the land as opposed to project landscaping, which creates its own imprint. It was noted with industrial developments large storage yards or chained linked fencing, which are not buildings or structures, are not considered part of the 40 percent lot coverage. a discussion followed whether to decrease the lot coverage not covered by a building or structure from 45 percent to 40 percent. Mr. Larson stated if there is an emphasis on Industrial use of property, then there must be some financial incentive since a 5 percent difference may make or break the "dollars figure" a land purchaser can pay to use the land for Industrial uses. The more opportunities are discouraged, the higher the price of land. Ms. Pruden inquired whether a 10 percent or up to 50 percent "bonus" would be feasible, depending upon certain factors. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 August 25, 1999 Mr. Larson replied a beautifully landscaped Industrial project could come in with a 50 percent lot coverage, especially if the project does not require much parking space. It was noted by Staff an Industrial use will require fewer parking stalls so there is a "trade-off" lot coverage for less parking. It was noted parking lots are no less objectionable than buildings. Ms. Pruden proposed there be "flexible" language provisions whereupon a set lot coverage percentage may be subject to change. Mr. Larson recommended the standard lot coverage be set at 40 percent, but the Planning Commission may exercise discretion allowing up to 50 percent building coverage, based upon a comprehensive landscape plan. , · It was noted if project building lot coverage changes, then the landscaping coverage will also change proportionately. Mr. Stump stated there must be substantial criteria to support percentage changes for Industrial lot coverage. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to recommend with regard to item 2, Maximum Lot Coverage, the last sentence be deleted, and add a new sentence to read, "Industrial land uses may cover a maximum of 50 percent of a lot provided that the site planning, architecture, parking, and landscaping are consistent with the requirements of the AlP Planned Development Ordinance." Ms. Pruden stated, referencing item 3, Minimum Building Setbacks, she supports Staffs proposal for lots abutting U.S. Highway 101 shall maintain a minimum setback of 60 feet from the property line adjacent to the freeway. Pages 17 & 18 No changes and/or recommendations. Page 19 It was noted the change, referencing item c, Development Integration is a "housekeeping item." No changes and/or recommendations. Page 20 No changes and/or recommendations. Page 21 September 8, 1999, it was noted by Staff the new language on pages 21 and 22 reflects consistency MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 August 25, 1999 the language with the Planning Commission and the City Council have previously as approved regarding in other zoning districts. No changes and/or recommendations. Page 22 Commissioner Larson stated he does not favor the phrase, referenced in the first sentence, "reasonably short amount of time." He also stated he does favor the specific language, referencing item j, to include, "Parking lot trees shall primarily be deciduous species, and shall be designed to provide a tree canopy coverage of 50 percent over all paved areas within ten years of planting." He commented this language is not consistent with language in the Amendments pertinent to this issue. Mr. Stump replied, at the direction of the Planning Commission, Staff would make the language consistent. ' · Commissioner Puser stated the ten year reference is for tree canopy and the other general references are in connection to landscaping. Mr. Larson replied the above-referenced language is specifically "spelled out." Chairman suggested using the short standard time period, which in planning, is generally one to five years. a brief discussion followed regarding a reasonable or realistic number of years it would take for landscaping to become "viable and mature." It was consensus of the Commissioners to recommend item h, pages 21 & 22 be revised to read, "All landscape plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and mature appearance can be attained in three years." Ms. Pruden inquired referencing item I, first sentence, whether "12 parking stalls shall have a tree placed between every four parking stalls within a continuous linear planting strip" can be changed to 8 parking lots. Mr. Stump replied the standard has been 12 parking stalls for other zoning districts. He stated parking lot/landscape requirements should be consistent throughout the zoning districts. Commissioner Larson suggested with reference to item j, to change the language stating the AlP parking lot standards must conform to the City landscape and parking lot guidelines Page 23: No changes and/or recommendations. Page 24: Lighting MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 18 August25,1999 It was the consensus of the Commissioners to recommended Staff revise language referencing Lighting, item c. pertinent to "light pollution" concerns. The Planning Department revised the language for the aforementioned section to read, "Lighting shall not be directed towards Highway 101, the Ukiah Municipal Airport, adjacent properties, or upwards towards the sky." page 25: Circulation Plan a general discussion followed regarding the revised language referencing AlP southern access. It was noted the original AlP southern access road, Airport Pack Boulevard to Norgard Lane is no longer envisioned. ' Chairman Pruden suggested language be included in the AlP is regarding projects adjacent to the Railroad with the potential for future access circulation for freight and passenger service. Mr. Stump stated it is important to note standard railroad requirements in the/kiP are not currently necessary, but language noting there exists a potential for future railroad circulation is relevant to the Ordinance amendments. Mr. Larson commented with regard to the "right-of-way" in the AlP, the City should "either commit itself to a right-of-way or leave it alone," because it amounts to developing a spur siting. The City should acquire enough right-of-way to provide a spur siting to service industrial sites. It was noted the aforementioned issue should be included in future Commission discussions when reviewing a proposed project. Commissioner Correll noted railroad right-of-ways are becoming increasingly expensive because as far as the telecommunication industry is concerned, there are major corridors now for fiber optics and the railroads are looking at those right-of-ways as a good source of revenue. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to recommend Staff craft language to indicate there is awareness a railroad transportation corridor is contiguous to the AlP. The Planning Department added a final sentence to the circulation paragraph to read, "Property owners of parcels with frontage along the railroad right-of-way are encouraged to plan for possible future use of the railroad." Page 26: It was noted by Staff the revised language was added to be consistent with the City's Zoning Code Administration Chapter. No changes and/or recommendations. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 19 August 25, 1999 Page 27: Section Eleven Staff stated this section is new and is word-for-word with the other language outlined for the other zoning districts in conjunction with the sections outlining a guideline for situations when there is not an "allowed or permitted land use designation" articulated, then the City Planning Director is given the authority to make a determination whether the use is appropriate in the land use designation. The Planner Director can make a decision as to whether or not it is an allowed or permitted land use and this section is designed to provide the criteria necessary for the Planning Director to make such a determination. It was further noted by Staff this language is identical to the other zoning districts which was recommended by the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council. He stated it is not possible to list every conceivable allowed or permitted lan(J use designation and this section provides the City Planning Director with some discretion to make the determination. It was noted this section allows for more administrative Planning Director determination as opposed to a discretionary determination. This matter is appealable to a pa~, seeking such a determination, which does not include the necessity for public notification. Chairman Pruden commented the language articulated in the AlP PD Ordinance Amendments should also be consistent with the Ukiah General Plan standards. It was the consensus of the Commissioners to recommend revision of item c to read, "That the use would be in harmony and consistent with the purpose and intent of the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance and Ukiah General Plan." There was a general discussion regarding appeal legalities for allowed or permitted land use designation determinations made in connection with the above-referenced language. It was noted Section Eleven was drafted by the City Attorney. Page 28: No changes and/or recommendations. Commissioner Larson recommended a notation be make for the City Council to consider directing Staff to reexamine the potential for residential housing opportunities in the AlP. It was noted by Staff with the above-referenced consideration the Commissioners make a recommendation, as part of the current recommendations, to the City Council that residential land uses either be allowed or permitted in whatever designation the Commissioners deem appropriate. This would eliminate the tedious process whereby recommendations be are made by the City Council and subject to review a second time for recommendation by the Planning Commission. It was not the consensus of the Planning Commission for the AlP to incorporate Residential land use, but the Commission was willing to discuss this matter at a later hearing. Chairman Pruden stated she recommends the Residential land use issue along with the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 20 August 25, 1999 "Professional Office" land use issues be discussed by the Commissioners at a later Planning Commission headng. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 9:56 p.m. ON a MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by an all AYE vote to recommend approval by the City Council the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Amendment (Ordinance No. 991) be amended to include the changes and/or revisions as discussed above and as outlined in the Staff Report. 9B. Ma_ior Site Development Permit 99-15, as submitted by Mr. Richard Ruff for Mark Mountanos to allow a mixed-use development on a 4.49 acre parcel located at 1270 .Airport Park Boulevard (180-080-27). The project involves the construction of a 28, 800 square foot warehouse building; a 19,800 square foot retail commercial building_ and a two story building with 15,850 square feet ~f retail commercial space on the ground floor and 15, 850 square feet of professional office space on the second floor It was noted the Planning Commission's approval of this Site Development Permit was contingent upon the City Council's eventual adoption of the AlP Planned Development Ordinance Amendment cited above. Associate Planner Lohse reviewed the Staff report and reported the Planning Department recommends approval of Major Site Development Permit No. 99-15 with Findings 1-9 and subject to Co. nditions of Approval 1-37 based on the grounds the proposed mixed-use development is consistent with the allowed uses, development standards, design requirements for the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development, as revised in AlP PD Ordinance Amendments recommended by the Planning Commission in agenda item 9A. Mr. Lohse stated approval of the Major Site Development Permit No. 99-15 would allow for construction of a "Mixed-Use", as recommended by the Commissioners in agenda item 9A, land development on a 4.49 acre site in the Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planned Development area. The project includes the construction of a 22,800 square foot warehouse structure, a 19,600 square foot retail/commercial building, and a two-story building with a gross floor area of 18,000 square feet with the retail/commercial gross indoor floor area of 15,850 square feet. He noted the extra area is taken up by the decks, the outdoor paving located on the north side of the building, and by some of the architectural features as noted on the elevations. He stated with reference to the recommended land use percentage ratio proposals in connection with "Mixed-Use" include the following: . Industrial component - 30.6 percent; Retail/commercial - 48 percent; Professional Office - 21.4%. He noted although these percentage ratios fully complied with the amendments as proposed in the "original" Staff Report for the AlP PD Ordinance Amendments, they are no longer totally consistent with the recommendations as proposed by the Planning Commission in agenda item 9A. He stated he wanted to distinguish between the percentage of lot coverage, which totals 38 percent of the lot MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 21 August25,1999 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Charley Stump, Senior Planner September 15, 1999 Attachment No. 4 - Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development (Item 8a) / Attachment No. 4 to the Agenda Summary Report for the above referenced item was inadvertently misplaced and was not included in the materials submitted to the Council. The attachment includes a Location Map, Site Plan, and Elevation Drawings for the Mountanos Site Development Permit that was conditionally approved by the Planning Commission on August 25, 1999. They are included with the Agenda Summary Report to illustrate an actual mixed-use project in the Airport Industrial Park. The Site Development Permit does not require City Council action, but the Planning Commission's conditional approval of the project is contingent upon the City Council's adoption of the proposed Ordinance amendments. MOUNTANOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-15 250 Airport Park Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 180-080-27) t % ! I I t t t I t I I I I I I ' Iq.I ! ! I I . I I ;. I I I I,I ! I I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 FT. SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet I ;0 W^f~EIIOU~EIDI~TI~UI~UHON 22.~00 ~F ~t^6 ~ ~o' ' I 12~-~O ^l~rC~t r^~R Dtv~ 180 080 : i with Resolution to Establish City Improvement Fund Revenue Generated by Rezoning & City Financial Assistance for Businesses at Redwood/Airport Park Whereas this and previous rezonings contradict General Plan expectations this sector of our City; and Whereas the Ukiah General Plan was created after dozens of volunteer citizens committed hundreds of hours and after the City Council allocated hundreds of thousands ol' dollars in the ell'orr; and Whereas the vision of the General Plan cannot be realized without significant new revenue dedicated to specific improvement goals. Such revenue is insufficient because too few of our taxes sent to Washington and Sacramento are returned to the City and because State law denies citizens of Ukiah the right to vote for a just and efficient local tax system; and Whereas citizens of Ukiah realize that rezoning in favor of retail commercial development yields significant new sales tax revenue to the City; and Whereas Ukiah citizens see no evidence that new corporate retail development and corresponding sales tax revenue has yielded improved service, commercial area beautification or general City improvement; however, Ukiah citizens see negative impacts as giant corporate chain stores move in, seeking to eliminate competition from locally owned businesses while generating serious traffic and air pollution problems ;and Whereas the citizens of Ukiah will be more accepting of such negative impacts only when they are guaranteed that new tax revenue will be dedicated to specilic improvement goals; and Therefore, the City of Ukiah hereby establishes a special fund to receive d~hty percent of all stiles tax and bed tax revenue yearly from any Airport/Redwood Park business benefiting from rezoning or. from City financial assistance, loans, tax rebates, amnesties, or expenditures, beginning September 15, 1999. The majority of the City Council of Ukiah shall vote to utilize the revenue in this special fund only for the following: A. utility undergrounding on Perkins and State streets B. circulation improvements for Perkins, State, and Gobbi streets C. park, open space, pedestrian, bicycle path, trail and creek enhancement D. recreation & arts program scholarships for economically struggling families AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9a DATE: October 20. 1999 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH REDWOOD BUSINESS PARK A tentative agreement has been negotiated with Redwood Business Park for settlement of litigation with the City of Ukiah. City Attorney David Rapport is working with Redwood Business Park's Attorney to finalize the settlement language. The agreement will be discussed in Closed Session before approval by the Council in open session. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Council approve Settlement Agreement with Redwood Business Park ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Council remand Settlement Agreement to staff for further modifications prior to approval. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Dave Rapport, City Attorney 1. None. Candace Horsley, City I~anager 4: Can :AsrAg ree. R B P