Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-03-19 PacketMINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 The City Council convened in a regular meeting, for which the agenda was legally noticea ana pusted, at 6:32 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were PRESENT: Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. Staff present: Customer Service Supervisor Archibald, Public Utilities Director Barnes, Finance Director Elton, Assistant City Manager Harris, Ukiah Business Development Consultant Holtkamp, City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Rapport, Planning Director Sawyer, Senior Planner Stump, and Recording Secretary Yoast. Mayor Malone offered a moment of silence in remembrance of Judy Bari. 2. pledge of Allegiance Councilmember Mastin led the Pledge of Allegiance. Approval of the minutes was moved to this time to allow City Attorney Rapport time to prepare his special presentation. 4. Approval of Minutes 4a. Regular Adjourned Meeting - February 19, 1997 MIS MastinlMalone to approve the minutes of the Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 19, 1997, as submitted, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. ABSTAIN: None. 4b. Regular Meeting - February 19, 1997 MIS MastinlMalone to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 19, 1997, as submitted, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. ABSTAIN: None. 4c. Regular Adjourned Meeting - February 26, 1997 MIS MastinlChavez to approve the minutes of the Regular Adjourned Meeting of February 26, 1997, as submitted, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, and Mastin. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. ABSTAIN: Mayor Malone. 3. Special Order of Business 3 a. Continuation of Legal Workshop City Attorney Rapport recalled that at the previous Legal Workshop, Council was able to complete four of the seven scheduled items, and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was subsequently discussed at the Planning Workshop. This presentation will provide information on "Gifts and Liability." He reported City Councilmembers are prohibited from accepting gifts from any single source in excess of $250 in a calendar year, with the exception of an advance payment or reimbursement for travel and related lodging expenses, provided certain other conditions exist. These include: 1) if the travel is reasonably related to a legislative or governmental purpose or an issue of state, national, or international public policy, and for the purpose of delivering a speech, in which case the reimbursement is limited to the day immediately preceding the speech, the actual day of the speech, and the following day of the speech; 2) if the travel is provided by a governmental agency or a bonafide public or private educational institution or non-profit, charitable, or religious organization; 3) if the travel is being provided by the City, or 4) if the travel is in connection with a bonafide personal business or profession, provided the payments can be deducted under IRS rules as a qualified business expense. There are certain other gifts that are also excluded from the limitation, including wedding and holiday gifts, providing they are not substantially disproportionate in value. The City Attorney also discussed the liability of Councilmembers, noting that the State Legislature provides a limited waiver of the City's immunity. He further provided the Council with a memorandum regarding liability. Mayor Malone inquired relative to the liability attached to Brown Act violations. Mr. Rapport replied the Brown Act indicates, in G.C. Section 54960.1, that any decision made during a meeting where the Brown Act violation occurred can be set aside. He added that action can be filed by the District Attorney or any interested person. There are no additional punitive damages allowed, but there is a right to recover attorney's fees by the plaintiff, if he or she prevails. Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 Page 1 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Mayor Malone explained the appeal process. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Malone noted two letters of request had been received to pull Item 6h, Approval of a Demolition Permit for a Structure Over 50 Years Old, Located at 577 Clara Avenue, from the Consent Calendar. The item was placed under New Business as Item 9c. MIS Mastin/Ashiku to approve the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Denied Claim for Damages received from Rau and Associates, and referred to City insurance carrier, REMIF; b. Adopted Ordinance No. 989 Amending the City Zoning Map to Rezone 7 Lots in the Miscellaneous Area No. 2 General Plan Rezoning Area; c. Adopted Resolution No. 97-59 Extending the "No Parking Zone" on the West Side of Despina Drive in Front of the Ukiah High School Tennis Court; d. Adopted Resolution No. 97-60 Establishing Restricted Hours for On-Street Parking on Streets Fronting Public Parks; e. Awarded Consultant Agreement to Lawrence and Associates for the Design of the Perimeter Gas Migration Corrective Action System for the City's Solid Waste Disposal Facility and approved Budget Amendment; Received notification regarding purchase of Chlorine Residual Analyzer; Received notification regarding purchase of a Printer/Plotter; Approved Demolition Permit for a structure over 50 years old located at 510 South Dora Street; Received and filed Bad Debt Write-offs for the year ending June 30, 1996; Received information relative to comments submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regarding review of the Flow Regime of the Russian River. fo The motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. ABSTAIN: None. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Malone explained the procedure for audience comments. Rio Palley, Youth Garden Alliance, advised the Council about the history of the Community Garden Project and the Observatory Park Site. As owners of this site, the City is required to develop a community project, and he would hope the Garden Project would be approved for this purpose. At the site last year, more vegetables than could be eaten were produced, which allowed for a contribution to the local food bank; it was a very enjoyable experience for everyone involved. This year the hope is to expand so that a larger portion of the community is included, such as the elderly and Iow-income individuals who might not have the space for a garden. They would also like to provide additional activities such as field trips and other educational opportunities. He invited everyone to attend an on- site meeting on March 12, 1997 to further discuss the project, and noted he could be contacted at (707) 743-2575 for further information. Mayor Malone suggested they contact the local public schools relative to having students participate in the activities at the Garden Project on one of the in-service days. Alida Burnstad, project participant, distributed a document that explained the goals for the project. She explained they are attempting to help youths help themselves, and it would be very nice to have the Park dedicated for this purpose. Dotty Copeland stated she thought it was wonderful that young people are interested in gardening in a way that is not harming the environment, and are industrious enough to carry through on the project. She hoped the Council and the community would support them, Patrick Burnstad noted he had just returned from a five-day computer convention. The hosts had invited groups of children to the event to experiment with the computers, with the result that the children were highly entertained and the researchers learned a lot from witnessing fresh perspective. 8. PUBLIC HEARING - 7:00 P.M. 8a. Community Development Block Grant Application - Madelin Holtkamp City Manager Horsley explained the process for applying for a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and introduced Madelin Holtkamp. Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 Page 2 Madelin Holtkamp, Ukiah Business Development Center, advised that CDBG's primary focus is to fund jobs for Iow and moderate income individuals. This application is for funding the construction of a bridge over Orr Creek, and street improvements to Orchard Avenue and Brush Street. The purpose of this public hearing is to receive public input from the community regarding the application. Another public hearing will be held after the application has been prepared, to receive additional public comment before it is submitted. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:09 p.m. No one came forward to address the item. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:10 p.m. Since the purpose of the public hearing was to receive public comment only, there was no further action taken by the City Council. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9a. Adoption of Resolution Implementing Rule and Regulation No. 2, Extension of Main Lines or Other Plant Facilities and Utility Connection Charges as Schedule 1615. Public Utilities Director Barnes noted this is one of the items necessary so that the Electric Utility can begin to prepare for the upcoming competition due to deregulation. This new policy will allow the City to charge for the transformers that the property owners need for their projects, or allow the owner the option of buying their own transformers elsewhere. This item will also come back to the Council at a later date to address the fees provided in Schedule 1615. At this time, the City is committed to approximately $85,000 in transformer costs. No one from the audience came forward to address this issue. MIS MastinlMalone to adopt Resolution No. 97-61, as presented by staff, was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelly. ABSTAIN: None. Councilmember Ashiku noted the City can no longer give away assets. Mayor Malone wished the City had itemized and advertised this expense in the past so the community realized the City was providing this incentive. City Manager Horsley explained it was considered an economic incentive in the past. 9b. Set Date for Electric Workshop Mr. Barnes explained that staff wanted to first hold a comprehensive workshop with the City Council, and after that occurs, conduct the Northern California Power Administration (NCPA) presentation. After discussion, it was determined the Electric Workshop would be held on April 14, 1997, at 7:00 a.m., in the City Council Chambers. City Attorney Rapport will not be in attendance. 9c. Approval of Demolition Permit for a Structure Over 50 years Old Located at 577 Clara Avenue Mayor Malone advised this item was previously pulled from the Consent Calendar, and would be considered at this time. Eric Larson, 123 Clara Avenue, and Donna Roberts, 781 Sidnie Court, both representing the Wagenseller Neighborhood Committee, introduced themselves. / Mr. Larson explained he and Ms. Roberts were equally involved in the Kmart project, and this demolition permit relates to that project. Their concern is not with the demolition directly but to the potential damage that would occur if the Fire Depadment were allowed to conduct a training burn at the site. Adjacent to the main house, there are three mature English walnut trees that were assumed would be incorporated into the Kmart landscape plan. One of the conditions of approval by the Planning Commission was that there be a 10 foot landscaped buffer from the Kmart project and the residential neighborhood. It has been a practice of the City Council, Planning Commission, and staff to try to preserve these types of trees. When the trees are leafed out it provides a beautiful canopy, which is reminiscent of the historical aspect of this area, since it appears there were walnut trees running the entire length of Clara Avenue at one time. There are no legal grounds by which the City can require the retention of the trees, but the City Council can encourage staff and the property owners to protect them. Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 Page 3 Ms. Roberts noted that besides the historical nature of the trees, they also provide a screen from the nearby stores. At this time, the site development plan shows the walnut trees are to be left at their current location, and four other trees on the property will be removed. A more recent plan done by architects Mitchell and Axt shows that the one tree in the City's right-of-way shall be removed, but City staff indicates it will remain. Since the trees are critical for screening, the neighborhood is requesting all precautions be made to protect the trees if the Fire Department is given permission to burn. Discussion followed regarding the roots of one tree touching the house, and that even if the trees are protected, the negative results may not be immediately visible. It was requested if it would be possible to have an arborist's opinion sought regarding the results of burning the house this close to the trees. Ms. Horsley replied she talked to the Fire Engineer in charge of the training burns, and he advised there were some limbs that required cutting on the tree that is overhanging the house, but they routinely protect and wet down the trees. Councilmember Ashiku asked how essential this practice bum was to the Fire Department, and voiced his concern relative to air pollution from the burn. Ms. Horsley replied this type of activity offers the only live training for the Firefighters and Volunteers, and that the opportunity arises infrequently. Discussion was had regarding ways to protect the trees, who approves the way the bum will be conducted, and whether Council could determine that the trees are more important than the control burn or place other requirements relative to the trees. Ms. Horsley noted under the City's ordinance, training fires are allowed, and the crews check the backdrafts. They do not have to conduct the burn but the Fire Engineer has looked at the site and determined it could be controlled. The City can bring an arborist in, for a fee, to look at the trees and provide an opinion on their safety. She further noted she has a call into the property owner to see what his intentions are regarding the trees. Mayor Malone opened the discussion up to the public again. Judy Pruden, 304 S. Hortense, explained the process the Fire Department goes through with the property owner to make sure the structure is prepared properly before the burn takes place. MIS AshikulMastin to approve the Demolition Permit for a structure over 5'0 years old, located at 577 Clara Avenue, with direction to staff to ensure the burning of the structure is conducted in such a fashion that the three mature trees are protected and that the degree of pollution associated with the burn is kept at a minimum, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSENT: CouncilmemberKelly. ABSTAIN: None. 10. CITY COUNCIL/REPORTS Councilmember Chavez noted she did not have any reports on Board meetings, but did attend the Board of Supervisor's training regarding welfare reform. Much of the discussion revolved around safety net issues, (Adult Services, Redwood Legal Assistance, Ford Street Project, and Ukiah Food Bank). The reform is going to add an additional strain on these organizations, and since they are already facing financial difficulties, they are concerned. She explained who would be losing their assistance and the potential impacts. Several organizations affected will be in the City jurisdiction, such as Plowshares, which is already operating at full capacity. Additionally, she noted that on Sunday, March 9, at 1:30 p.m., at the Ukiah Council Chambers, there will be the Women's Leadership Program. There will be poetry, music, story-telling, and a silent auction to raise funds. The guest speaker will be Virginia Strom-Martin. Ms. Horsley noted the commentators will be Councilmembers Kelly and Chavez. ~ Councilmember Chavez further reported that on Saturday, March 8, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. there will be a mini-conference at the Mendocino College that will address new immigration laws and public health, in conjunction with a health fair. She also noted she is a member of the American Cancer Society and is selling daffodils that are available for delivery to local addresses. Discussion followed regarding the upcoming Inland Water and Power Commission meeting and it was noted Mayor Malone would be attending. Councilmember Chavez completed her comments by advising that the Main Street Program is holding a workshop Saturday, March 8, 1997, at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 Page 4 Councilmember Ashiku reported that 60 fish were removed from the hatchery by a poacher. He further reported that he and Public Utilities Director Barnes spent two days at the annual Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) meeting, where they learned that the City should take action to develop a strategic plan, because the whole electric industry is rapidly changing. In addition, the meeting also provided information relative to ways to protect the City's market with the legislative proposals currently on the table. The City needs to make some decisions about how it is going to handle all the changes. Councilmember Mastin reported on his attendance at the February 27 Mendocino Transit Authority Board (MTA) meeting, and that everything appears stable for MTA at this time. They are waiting for the auditor's report, and what funds they will be receiving from Mendocino County Office of Government. The five big senior citizen centers in the area will be helping develop a formula for their funding, which factors in growth for each year. He reported on his attendance at the Susan Bell support meeting. It was an interesting gathering, and everyone was very supportive of Susan and her cause. Economic Development and Financing Corporation (EDFC) also met; things are stable there as well. Consultants Madelin Holtkamp and Carolynn and Bill Thomas discovered a $13,000 payment that EDFC expected to make had already been partially paid; as a result, the transfer was only $1,200. The record keeping is finally current. The agencies and three cities have all paid their annual fees, and EDFC was able to pay their bills. Further, the Economic Development Director in Ft. Bragg is resigning, and Ft. Bragg is discussing joining EDFC after that time. He further advised he will not be present for the March 19, 1997 City Council meeting. Mayor Malone reported that on Friday, March 20-21, 1997, the League Policy Committees will be meeting at the San Francisco Airport, and he is planning to attend the Community Services Policy Committee meeting. He also recently participated in the ribbon cutting ceremony for the Cleveland Lane Self-Help/Ukiah Redevelopment Agency project. He noted that the City recently had its first Investment Oversight Committee meeting, where Nancy Jones from PFM Management Services spoke. The Council will be receiving a status report on the City's investments; he felt this to be a very good and healthy process. Further, the Train Station Committee has been doing quite well raising seed money for the Ukiah Train Station site, and there is wide support in the community for this project. 11. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS None. 12. CLOSED SESSION (NONE) 13. ADJOURNMENT MIS AshikulMastin to adjourn the meeting carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Councilmembers present. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. b: ky\ccmn3597 Karen Yoast, Recording Secretary Regular Meeting - March 5, 1997 Page 5 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. DATE REPORT March 19, 1997 SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1997 Payments made during the month of February 1997, 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: 94670-94766, 94926-95100, 95263-95331,77436 Payroll check numbers: 94767-94925, 95104-95262 Direct Deposit numbers:847-947 Void check numbers: 95101-95103 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 February 1997. 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:( ~ F~~-~~,._ ~ce"l--Ic:;rsley,-City I~lanager AGENDA.WPD/krs 000000~~0~0~00000 O~ %0 O~ ~0 00~ O0 ~~ ~ 0 ~0 ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ © 0 ~ 00~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 O~ O~ I i < ~aO © O'.-4 · ~0 © · · o · o bJO~, · O0 0~0 O0 ~ 0~ 0 0 O0 ~ 0~0 O0 0 0~0 0 0 O0 0 ~oo ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ O0 O0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 000 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 000 0 0 ~ 0 0 mm r'0o oo · o,~ · o o · oo o o oo oo oo oo ooo o ooo oo o ooo o o ooo o ooo oo o ooo o o ooo o ooo oo o ooo o o l.~l.-~r,o I-~ I.--~1.-~I.-~ i-~1-~ i-~ ot.~o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o~ ~0 0000000 OZ ~JO ZO < © O© O0 mZ 0000~ < ~0 © oo o~ ~0 © ~0~ ~ ~~0~0 0~ ~ ~ ~HH~ ~HO O~OOOOOO OOOOOOOO O~O~O~ OOOO~O~O ~~O~O O~O~O~ ~OOOO~O~ OOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO OOOOOOO~ ~ooo~o~ ~ooo~o~ ~oo~oo ooo~oooo o~oo~o ~oo~o~ oo~ooooo oooooooo oooooooo oooooooo o~o oo~o oooooooo oooooooo oooooooo 00000000 0'~ .r,,. o I ¢:, 00 I 1,9 G0 o o 1,o kid ~ .-4 (.,n c~ o'~ I O 0'1 O 0/ ~ O O O 00 OOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O OOOOOOOO o o O O O O O O OOOOOOOO O O O O O O O O IIII OOOO OOOO OOOO OOOO O~ >0 O~ 00000000 ~0 (Dm < ~0 © oo o~ ~0 ~0~000 ~0~0~ ~0~00 ~0~00 z~ z ~ uc z z zoo o~~ ~ ~ oz~ ~ ~ ~ o~ 00000 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ 00000 0 0 O~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 .,,,0 0 · .. -- -- ~~ o o o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ooo~ ~ ~ ~o o o o -- o oo 00,,0 ooooo ~ ~ oo ~ ~ o ~ ooooo o o ~ o o ~ o _ _ ooooo o o oo o o o o 00000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 ~ 0 0 0000~0~0 ~0~0~0 ~~0~00~ 0~0000~00 000000000 000000000 000000000 00000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 00000 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 ~~ ~ 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 000000000 000000000 000000000 ~~~0~ ~0 ~0 ~0 > © ~X~ ootn o < 0 < 0 oo~0 oo0~ · 0 · · 0000000000 0000000000 ~~000000 ~ooo~oooo o~oo~~ ~o~~oo ooo~ooo~ oooooooooo oooooooooo o~o~oooooo ~oo~oo~ ~ooooo~ 0 ~ 000000 000000 00~00 0~0000 000000 000000 0 i · · · · . . i i · · ooo ooo ooo 0000000000 0000000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 00 00 00 ['0 IN.) ~ 0 00 O0 O0 t-~ I-~ >'o Q ©Q 0 0 i I.--I om < © o(3 o~ ~0 ~0 Ora oo · o o · o o o o o o 0 0 d'~ '~ 00 00 00 00 ~~00~ 0~000~0 ~00~ 000~0~0 0000000~ 00000000 0000000~ ~0~0 0 ~~ 0 00000 0 00000 O~ ~0~ OGO0 · H 0 ~0~ H~ HH 0000 0000 0~00 ~0~ ~<<< 0©~ 0~ COO) OD o00 ooo · 0 0 i ~-~ OD I-~ O0 · 0 O(4 ~ 0 · 0 00 · 00 00 00 Or~H ~ Z kD CO O0 00 · · 0 . oo o o OO i.~ ~ o o o o o o Po 1,3 t-~ 0 oooooooo oooooooo oooooooo ~~o~ 0o0o oooo oo00 oooo ooo ooo ooo ooo oo o o oo I~ I~ o o o o OO oqD O~ >o ~0 0000000000000000000000~ ©©©©©©©©©©© < L'aU © oO ~] o~ ~0 Oqq~ oH OOOO ~OOO ~OO O~ OOOO · 0 U'I O Ul 0~ 0~ 0~ omm ~ ~ ~0 ~ O0 ~0 O0 ~ ~ OO OO OO O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 HH~~HHHHHHHHHH~H~HHH 00~0 0 00=0 0 00~0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0000000~00~0~00~0~0~0 ~0~0~0~00~0~0~~0 ~00~0~0~0~0~000000~ 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 00~0~0000000000~0~000 0000 ~ ~0 ~ ~ o~ 0000 O0 O0 O0 0000 O0 O0 O0 0000 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000 O~ >o 00~ H H O0 HO 0 O0 < ~0 © oo ~0 0o0 o00 ooo · 0 ooo 00o 0 O© 0~ O0 · 0 · · 0~-~ mm O~ O0 ~0~ ~0~ ~00~ o o o o o o 00 OO oo oo o0oo 0000 0000 0000 00 O0 O0 ~0 ~ ~0 0 ~ ~H ~0 OH 0 < 0 ~0 0o I--t 0 ~0 0~<~ ooo 000 ~00 o~ o~0 ooo O0 0000 0000 I.-~ 00 ~.-~ 0000 0000 0000 O0 O0 i.-~ 0 0 ~--~ 0 0 0 0~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~0 0 0 0 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 000 o o 0 o ° ° ~ ~ Q 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 > > ~ ooo~o u ~ ~ ~ o~z 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ o oooo ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o oooo o ~ ~ ~ oo ~ 0 ~ 0000 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~~ 0 0 0 .... ~ . . 0 . ~ ~ 0 0000 ~ ~ 0 0 · · 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 00~0 0 0 0 I..-~ I-.~ ~..~ 000 000 COO) OD 000 000 000 h.) ~--~ 0 0000 0000 0000 ~0~ 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OH >0 000000000000000 000000000000000 oooooo~ HHHHHH~ OOOOO ~OOOO 00000 00000 0~000 ~00 000~00~0000000 ~0~00~00~0~0 ~0~00~00~0 ~~000~0~ ooo0o0~oo0~o~ ooooooooooo00o0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 000000000000~0~ ZZZZZ~Z ~00~ 0000~0 ~00~ ~00~ 00~00 0000~o 000000 000000 000000 ~ o ~ <<< < H~HH~ H~HH~ ~ooo~o Z~ZZ~ 000000000 000000000 ~000~0 00~000~0 000000000 000000000 000000000 ~0000000 00000 00000 00000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000000 000000000 000000000 HHHH 0000 ~0 ~Z ~0~ 00~0 0~ ~0 O~ i OZ H < < HHO ~H ~ < ~0 ~d © oo ,0 l.-q 000~ ~00 00000 OOOOO 00000 OOOOO [-q oo oo · o o · o~ · oo o o o o ~00~0000 0 00,0000 00~0000 0 0 0 0 '420% O~ · ' 0 O, 0 0 0 0 i-~ t_~ 0060 o · , 0 -.40-,4 OOO H i o o o o o ~ 0 k...~ ~-~ o · o o 0'10'10'1 00o 000 · 0 ooo ooo . . · 0 ooo ooo o0o 00000 00000 00000 CO 00 0'10~ 00 00 00 C,n Crt I.~0 0000000 0000000 MMO0~ ~00~ ~0000~ 0000000 0000000 0000000 U'~ (.n co C~ 00 O0 00 0~42 (_n Ln CO 60 0'/ Ch 0 0 00 00 -.4 O~ 0:)000:) 000 000 000 0~] O0 ~0 0 H O~ ~ o <DO o~ ~0 © o~ H H 0000000~~0~0~000~0 mm z 0 ~o~ oH ~0 ~0 mm ~Q O0 Q~ 0 OQ ~0 0, 000000000000000 0 000000000000000 0 0 ~000~~00000 000000~000000 000~~0~00~ ~~000~00~~ 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 . 0 © · o o ~ mm 00~0~ 000000 ~0~0~ ~00~ 000~0 000000 000000 000000 0000 0000 <~ 0 0~ © · oo 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000000000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000 0~~ O~ 0'~ 0'~ 000 000 000 000 000 000 00 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 4::,(4 OH >o oo u [-q :~o oo H © ~~0 O(3 o o oo · . · · ©0 oo 0 Oho0 0 0000 © o 000 ~o~ 0oo I.-I I.-I · · · ~<~ 0 0~0 0~0 ~00~ 0~00 0000 0000 0000 O0 O0 I I 00 00 O0 00 O0 O0 ,~ 00 00 00 00 00 I I I 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ o00 -.J u~ u'~ ooo 000 ooo ooo 0o0 .~ ~ ~.~ oo oo o o o o OO oooo oooo oooo oooo oooo L~O 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ r..a 0 ~0 H I.-I O~ 0 O~ ~0 0000000 © o© ' ~0 ~o~o ~00 0000 0000 0000 · , · 0000 0000 0000 0~ 0~ ooo ooo 0~ H ~ · · 0000000 ~o~ oooo~o~ 000~o0 o0000oo ooooooo o000o00 oooooo0 oooo oooo ~o oooo 00o0 oooo oooo oooo ooo ~ .r,,..r~ .r,,. u'~ 0'~ 0~ 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ 0'~ 0~ 0'~ 000 0 0 0 0 oo o t-.~ I.~ i-.~ ~-~ i-~ i.~ ~ i~1~ ~-~ ooo o o o o oo o o o oo o o o o oo o o ooo o o o o oo o o r~ N) 1,,3 i',o 1~3 iN) ~ t.~l.-4 i-~ o ooooooo ooooooo IIII111 ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo ooooooo ~ooooo ~o~~ o~ ~0 ~o I 0 ~0 0 <o i oooooooooo ~~~~0 O0 m~ 000~ HHHHHHHHHHH G ~ o <<,'4 00~ r~O OZ 0 U~ . 0 o© ~0 ~ i 00 ooo (..,n 0..~ L0 · 0 000 000 ~00 0~ 0~ O0 · ~ ~0 ~ 0 ~ O~ mm ~O~OOOOOOO O ~O OO OO~OOOOOO0 O OOO OO ~O~OOOO0 ~ OOO ~00~~ 0 ~ .0 OOOOOOOOOO O ~O OOOOOOOOOO O OOO O OOOOOOOOOO O OOO OOOOOOOOOO O OO~ 0 o ~ o o o o · o 0 · o o o o o o o o o ~0 oo o o · o ~ · o0'1 · oo oo oo ~ 0'~ o o o o o o o o ~-~ OOOOOOOOOO O OOO OO O O OOOOOOOOOO O OOO OO O OOOOOOOOOO O OOO OO O O OOOOOOOOOO O O00 OO O ~~~~ ~ OOO OO O O ~0k.0 "MM O O O O oo oO oo o o 0000000000~ ~ ~0 O0 ~0 mO O~ ZO ~10 ~0 ~0 ~0 oo ~0 c~ l~o ~ [',o o o (.f.1 co o oD IN3.r'- (:0 o o o 00 o o~~oo~o ~ oo ~ o ~ ~ o ~ o~o~oooo~o ~ oo ~ o o o o ~ ~oooo~o~o~ ~ ~o ~ ~ o o ~ o oooooooooo o oo o o ~ o o oooooooooo o oo o o o o o oooooooooo o oo o o o o o oooooooooo o o~ o o o o o ~000~ 0 ~~o ~oo ooo~ ooo~ ooooo ooooo ooooo oooooooooo o oo o o o o o o oooooooooo o oo o o o o o o oooooooooo o oo o o o o o o ~ooooooooo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo o~ooo o~ 000000000000000000000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ~0 © o(3 ~0 ~o~ 000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000 ~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~O~OOOOOO~OOO~OO~~O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO~O~OOOOOOOO~OOOOO~OO~O~O O~~O~OOOO~OOOOOOOOO~OOO~O~O~OO~OO~~OOOO~ ~OO~O~O~~~~~~OO~O~OO~O~O~OOOOO~~ 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~o ~0 ~0 0 ~10 ~0 O~ H H 00000000000~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0~ , · 0~ mm · , · · (.,nC,nO 0 mm · · o o U'~ O'~ 0 oo oo · oo · oo · o o oo o o 00000000000 ~ o~o~~ ~ ooooo~o~o Z oooo~o~oo~ ~~oo~o ~ ooooooooooo ~ ooooooooooo ~ ooooooooooo ooooooooooo ~-~ ..4 o ~ o -4-4 -,4-.4 oo oo o o o oo o o oo oo oo 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~-~ I'~ ~'J ~-~ 0 0 0 ~ IN.} 1-~ 0~0 O0 -,4 oo oo oo oo o o o o o o o o oo oo oo o o ooooooooooo ~ ooooooooooo H 00000000000 Z o~ ~n o, ~o c 000 0000~ HHHH O~ 0 oo ' ~0 0000~0~0000000~0000000 ~000~0000~00~0000~00~0 ~0~0~~0~0~0~~00~0~ 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000~0~00 kD I-~ O~ 0 00 · · oo o o ~0~0 00000 ~0~0 000~0 00000 00000 00000 0000~ 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000 010'~ o o o 0 o o o o o ~ 0oooo oo0oo ooooo ooooo O~ O~ 0 ~Z © 0 < © 0 ~ i.--] HO 0 0 I Z ~0 O0 ~0 © oo ~0 ~0~ .? ~ ~0~0 0~ c00'1Ln OOg'~ · 0 · 0 0 OO(4 · 0 0 000 000 OH~ Oh Ob Oh Ch 0'1 0'~ ~ 0'/ Ob Oh 01 Oh 0'1 0'~ 0'~ 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,,',. ,r',. 4::~, ,r,,. ~ ~ 4:~ ,i',,. ,r,. (.,O ~ LO ~ LO (.4 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 (.~ L~ (.4 1~0 IX,) 000 000 000 000 < ~ 0 0 ~ u~o ~JC~ u~O 0 oo ~0 H L.O 0'~ OLD · · 0 O, 0 · 0 0 0 00~0000000~ 00~~0~ ~00~~~0 0~000~0~0~ 00~0000~00 000000000000 000000000000 0~0000000000 o ~0 ~kDkO 0 bJ ....J <~ ~o mm · ~~<<<< O~Om~~ ~ ~HHHH 0000~00 0000~00 000~00 000~~ 0000000 0000000 LC) kD oo co c~ I I o o o o oo oooooooooooo oooo0000ooo0 oooooooooooo ooo00ooooooo m 0~ o o 00 o o o o oooo0oo 000ooo0 ooooooo ooooooo o00 ooo ooo ~o O~ ~X 0 ~0 I ~O ~O O O O~ ~O -.4.,40 ~HH ~ HH ~ o o o o · . 0 0 · l,O FO 0 0 (.j'l FO 1',3 0 0 0 0 ~OO~ 0 o o 0 o o o o oo0 · 0 . ooch · . c0 0g 00 0oo 00o . . . ooo ooo ooo ooo oo0 ooo ooo 0~O 0 oo ~0 o~ < © o(3 ~0 00 o~ o o o · oo 0~0~~0~0~0~0~000 ~ ~ C~O~ o~ ~0 © ~(~ c~ 000~ 0 H HO © > > < r. aO © OOLn i ooo 0oo · 0 00 t--~ OkDO , 0 0 000 · . 000 ~--~ 00 0 i.-.~ 0 0~ ~000oo~oo0 o 000 ~ ~o~ 0 000 000000000 0 000 ~~0~ 0 000 ~0~0~ ~ ~ 00~00~000 ~ 000 000000000 0 000 000000000 0 000 000000000 0 000 000000000 000 · 0 000 000 ~00000 ~ 0000000 ~ ¢:~ ¢., 00 t-~ ~ ~ 0 0 00 0 0 ~-~ ~ O~ 0 kD kD ~ 0 00 0'1 I~ · 00 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 0 000000 0 0 2~ 000000 qD C.n ~~CO~ 0 0 ~ 000000 0 0 C 000000 o 0 ~] oooooo o o Ln u'~ cn L,n 0 C,n0 0 oo o oo o oo0 i_~ ~,_.~ i...~ 0~ ~ ~0~0~ 0 000 000000000 0 000 000000000 0 000 000000000 00 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 I~ t-~ I~ 0 i"O I-~ 0 kD 000000 000000 000000 000000 OH 0 ~0 ZO~ I ~ O0 ~ © m < 0 o(3 ~0 ° 0 mm ~ O0 ~ ~ 0 O0 ~ O0 0 O~ · , 00 ~ 0 O0 0 · 0 ~ ~ 0 '0 ~ ..... 0 , ~ ~ O0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 ~ O0 ~ 0 00000 00000 ~0~ ~0000 00000 00000 00000 00000 ~ 0 r~O 0~ 0 0'~ 12~ I I ho. ho ~ 68L~ O0 0 'MM ~d *..4.-4 o o ~ ~ oo o oo o oo o 0 oo o 0 oo o oo o oo o o oo o o oo 0 oo 0 oo 0 0 OO o o ~o o ~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ooo0o ooooo ~o~ o~ H 0 O U o ~o © o < ~o © oQ t.J H [-q -4--4O · 0 I-~ I-~ o 0 0 o · o o 0 0 · o o o o o 0 o o o o ooo o L,J U~ ~:) 0'~ 0 ~) O.-4 · u~O · o . o o o o O©QQQ© a< o~o 0~0 00000 0~0 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 o 0'~ UJ · , 0 0~ 00 oD oo oo · 0'~ o · .~ oo · o o O0 O0 0'~ 0'~ i-J ~ o o o o O0 1',3 i.~ o o oo0o o o oooo 0 o 000o o'~ 0~, 0'~ 0'~ I.J PON.) r,,3 i.-.~ ~-..~ ~D PoN) N) o oo o (DO 0 O0 0 00 0 O0 0 O0 ~ 00 0 ~.~l-~ 00000 00000 00000 00000 0'~ 0'~ i-4 ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 o~ << << o i (3O H o ~~oooo~ o~om~~o < © 0, I~1 OHHHH 0QQ~Q 0~~ ~O~O OO~O O~ ~OOO OOOO OOOO OOOO o o , O ~~ O ~ ~~O~0 O ~O ~~O~0 O Ooo ~~0~0 0 000 o~ ~H ~ ~ 0~ ~ ~ ~ H HH © ~X OOOOOOOO o oooooooo O oO ~~o0 o oooooooo o ,0,,,0,0 . o~~o~ o O0 ,,,,,,,, , oooooooo O oo ~ooooooo o O0 oo~oooo o oo ~om o o~ ~H~HHHHH~H ~ ~ H OOOO OO~ OOOOOO~OOO0 O~OO~~OO~ OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO ~O~OOOOOO~O OOOO OOOO OOOO ~O~ O O OOOOOOOO O OO O O OOOOOOOO O OO O O OOOOOOOO O OO OOOOOOOOOOO IIIIIIII111 OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOO o~ >o HHHHHH ~0~ o < © i o ~00000~ 000000~ ~~00~ 00~00~ ~00~0 oooooo~ o00ooo0 0000000 0000000 ~00~~00000000000~ 000~~00000000000~ ~~0~0~0~0~0~ 0~~0~00~00000000~ ~.0~00~00~~~. .0,0,0,,0,,00,,,,0.00 000 0000000000000000 000 0000000000000000 000 0000000000000000 000 0000000000000000 ~0~00 ~0~00 ~ ~ o 0 ~ o o 2~ (..n o o ~ ~>~>> ~ o ~ ~ o ° ~0~00 H OH~H~ ~ 0 ~ H H 0 o o000 o o 0 o 0000 0 0 0 0 '°°' ' ' U ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 0~00 ~ 0 0 0 ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~0~ 0 0 ~ ~ C 0000 0 0 0 ~ 0000 0 0 0 0000 0 ~ ~ XXXXXXX 0000000 0000000 IIIIIII 0000000 0000000 0000000 ~~~~~~~0 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIO 00000000000000000000~ 00000000000000000000~ 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000 ~~~~0000000000 0000 0000 IIII 0000 0000 0000 0 0 0 ~ 0000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 o o o oooo o o 0 ~ o~ ©m HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Om o~ o ~o oo o~ < ~0 © oo z~2222~222222~2222~d222 0HOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ©m ~~000~~0~000000000 ~0000~00~~0~00000000000 ~00000~~00~0~00~0~ ~~~OOOO~O~OOO~OO~ O~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00 ~o~o ~~o 00~ o~? ZZ'~ · H 0000 ~000 ~00 0~ 0000 0~ HHHHHH ~~O OO~O O~~O ~00oo~ 000000 000000 000000 000000 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0000 oooo oooo oooo XXXXXX 000000 OOOOOO IIIIII 000000 000000 ~0~ o~ >o 0 M ~ Q O0 ~ ~ 0 ~ . ooo Q 00~ 0 O0 0 ~0 O~ XO ~0 Q~ 0 O0 ©X Q mo Q~ < r. aO Q~ © o(3 ~0 ~oo~0 o o ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~o~~~ o 0 ~ 0~0 0~~~ ~ O0~O0 ~ 0000000 q''~'' m q Z m~m~ oo ooo~o~ o ooooo oo oooooo~ o oo~oo ~o o~o~o o ~.~ .~ ~o~ o · . o · . o ........ ~o ~o o ooooooo ~ oo oo o ooooooo o oo oo o ooooooo o oo oo o ooooooo ~ '.40,,4 -.40-.4 · , L~ 00.~ 0 I.-I I--i , · · 0 o o ooo ooo 0oo 0 (3O © · · · 0 o~0 <~r~ ~-q ~ mm · · o o 0000000 00~~ ooooooo ~00000 00000 O0 0000000 00000 O0 0000000 00000 O0 0000000 00000 O0 0000000 o o o o o o oo oo o o OO oo 000 Oh 0'~ O0 000 0 O0 000 0 O0 000 0 O0 0~ ~ ~ o~ >0 HHHHHHH 0000000 HHHHHHH ~0 0 ~M U 0 0 ~ O~ O~ 0 0~3 < ~0 © o© %0 Z~ZZZZZZ © OO~OOO~ o~o0o~ OOOOOOO 0000000 ~000000 0 ~ ~~ H 0000000000 0000000000 00~00~~ ~OOO~OOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO 0~0~0~0~00 o OO~o OO~0~O oo~o~ 00~00~ ~0~0 000000 000000 0~0000 OOOOOOO O OOOOOOO O OOOOOOO O ~~~ O ~~OOOOO~ OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO ~~~O IIII ~ooooo O~~ o~o~ ~OM~O~ IIIIII OOOOOO 000000 000000 000000 000000 o~ 0 O0 O~ O~ mO mm ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ < < ~aO © oO ~0 0 O0 0 ~ 0 0~00~ O0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0~000 O0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0~~ O~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0~0~0 ~0 · ~ ~ 0 0 ~0~0~ .~ ~ ....... O. O0 0 0 0 00000 0 · . ..... O0 0 0 0 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 00000 0 O0 0 0 0 00000 0 ~0~ 0 ' 0 0 . 0 .r,,. 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0~ i~ o o o o · . oo · , Oo o o o o 0 O0 0 0 0 00000 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 00000 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 00000 O0 o 0 ~ -.J o o o o o o oO o~ o~ O.-J oo oo O0 O~ ~0 o 0 < ~0 © o(3 ~0 00 ~.1 o~] ~o ~ ~ ~ o~o; ~Q~ ~ ~ O~ ©0~ mmo OQ o~ ~0 0 ~0 i CO · I N ~0 0 O~ i ~ OZ H 0 © I.-I 0~ 0~ · oo · ~00 0~0~~ ~ ~ ~ 000~000~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ............ ¼ b ~ ~00~0000~ ~ ~ ~000000~0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~00~000 0~00~000 ~00~0~00~ ~0~0~0~ ~0~0~~ 0~000~0000 0000000000 0000000~00 00~000000 kJ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 I.~ 00 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 t-~ I-~ I~ ~ 00 0 0 0 0 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 O000000HO0 HHHH ~or~ 0 0 © 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~0 < < ~0 © oO 01 o (.n o 01(4(,.) o L.n o o 0h c~ c,,~ 0~~ 0000 0000 0000 -,4-4 O0 000 · , ooo ooo 0 · · · oo 0~ 0~ , o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o oo o o o o o oo o ~ o i~ f,0 1~0 I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~-~ o oooo o oo oo o o o oooo o oo oo o o o oooo o oo oo o o o oooo o ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ o~] 0 ~0000~ ~Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 O~ 0000 ~ m ~ 0 ~ ~m 0 © ~0 < 0 oo oo~oo ~ o o oo~ooo o o o ~~o ~ o o o~oo~o ~ o o _ 000000 ~ 0 000000 0 0 000000 0 ~ ~0000~ 0 ~ <~~ 0~~ 0000 0000 0000 oooooo C oooooo o o o oooooo o o o 000000 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 O~ Ill--IH 0(~ ~0 < 0 oc~ 00 I.~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~0~ 0 ~ ~ ~~0 0 ~ ~ 000000 0 0 0 ~ 00000 ~ ~ 0 0 00000 ~ 0 ~ ~ 00~00 ~ ~ ~ 0 00~00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00.00 0 0 0 0 ~ ~0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 0 000 ~ 0~ o o× ~ 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 ~ ~ 0 O0 0 ~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~ O~ 0 .~ ~ -- ' ' 0 . 0 O0 0 0 .. 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O~ ~ 0 <~o o · 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 0 0 00000 0 0 ~ 0 00000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 0 o~] >o < u < O0 o o u ~o 0 © L~ < I.-I < o O(3 ~0 I.~ L~ o 01 -4 ¢:,, o o ooo 00o ~0 o q< I.-I © © · · · 0 0 ~0 O0 oo O0 u~ o O. (40 o 0 o o 0 O..4-4 ON) lO 0 Cn L,n i ~ H i · · · 0~ 0'1 0'~ O~ ~ 0'1 01 C~ 0'~ 0'1 0'~ 0'1 0'1 o o 0 o 0 0 o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 o 0 o o ooo00oo ooo000o I111111 0000000 0000000 0000000 0'101 O0 0 0 0 0 1',3 ~ -401 0'~ O~ (4(4 0'/0'1 O0 O0 0 0 0'/0'1 (4(4 0~0'~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 I~1~ 0~] · ooo ooo 0~ (DO · · oo oo oo o o oo oo ~0 O~ 0 ~<. < ~0 0 < 0 © ~D ~ 0 0 ('3 0 0 0 oo AGENDA SUMMARY DATE: Sc ITEM NO. March 19, 1997 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A 20 MINUTE RESTRICTED ON-STREET PARKING SPACE AT 756 SOUTH STATE STREET SUMMARY: The attached resolution, if adopted, will establish a 20 minute restricted on- street parking space in front of 756 South State Street. This parking space would replace a 2 hour restricted on-street parking space. The Traffic Engineering Committee received a request from Carolyn Jeffers, Proprietor of C.J. Pool and Spa Supplies, for the establishment of a 20 minute restricted on-street parking space in front of her business located at 756 South State Street. Ms. Jeffers has informed the Committee that the permitted 2 hour parking limit in front of her establishment does not meet the short term parking needs of her customers. After considering this request at their regular meeting of March 11, 1997, the Committee recommended that one 20 minute restricted on-street parking space be established. This 20 minute restricted parking space will replace an existing 2 hour restricted space. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution establishing a 20 minute restricted on-street parking space at 756 South State Street. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine change is not appropriate and do not adopt resolution. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: Carolyn Jeffers Requested by: Traffic Engineering Committee Prepared by' Rick Kennedy, Public Works Director/City Engineer ~.,~-~' Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution 2. Letter of Request to Traffic Engineering Committee Candace Horsley, City IV~nager ASR20min 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 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING A 20 MINUTE RESTRICTED ON-STREET PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF 756 SOUTH STATE STREET WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) received a request from the proprietor of C,J, Pool and Spa for a short term restricted on- street parking space in front of the business located at 756 South State Street; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee has made a recommendation to the City Council that one 20 minute restricted on-street parking space be established in front of 756 South State Street, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 7161 of the Ukiah Municipal Code, a 20 minute restricted on-street parking space in front of 756 South State Street is hereby established, PASSED AND ADOPTED this , day of , roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , 1997, by the following ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, Mayor Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk Dear Larry Woods; Thank-you so much for dropping by yesterday..Feb. 12. i am following up'~n writing what we discussed with reference to the parking situation here at 756 S. State St, C J's Pool and sTe moved here in August 1996. Since that time it has become more and more obvious that the parking is difficult for my customers. I have had several of them call to complain about the parking. During August, Sept. and Nov. we noticed several cars would park out front and we would not know who they were, or where they went. On many occasions the vehicles would park there in excess of the 2 hour posted parking limit. We called the City of Ukiah to see if the Meter Maid could come this way and monitor the parking situation. We were told that the parking limit was not enforced at this end of town. I would like to request this situation be reviewed by the Traffic Engineering Committee. My request is that the spot directly in front of 756 S. State St. be changed to either a loading zone or a 20 minute limit parking area. The spot evidentially used to be painted green, I understand it used to be a loading zone. I have many deliveries during the week, and customers require the loading of their goods purchased at C J's. Some of the supplies we sell are heavy. Most of my customers are'here no more than 20 minutes. ~hey need to get in and Get out easily. If not, I loose customers. Wal Mart sells chlorine also, and they have plenty of parking. I have had several customers admit that they hmw~ driven by, saw that there was no available parking, and ended up picking up their chlorine from Wal Mart. My customers admit they would prefer doing business with me because of the service we offer, but they are frustrated with the parking situation. I hope you can help. Most Sincerely, ~e~~ Director, Little Waters Trust dba: C J's Pool and Spa k. ITEM NO. 7a DATE: MARCH 19, 1997 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUT REGARDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Ukiah Community Center (UCC) is completing an analysis of the financial feasibility of purchasing the property upon which its facility is located to reduce long term costs associated with their operations. Depending upon the outcome of that study, UCC may request the City to submit a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application on their behalf. An integral part of the application process is to conduct a public hearing during the project design stage to inform the general populace of the CDBG Program, discuss the benefits to the Program, and provide an opportunity for public input regarding potential uses of the monies. This public hearing has been noticed and will be conducted to complete that requirement. This is similar to the public hearing held at the Council's March 5 meeting relative to Economic Development CDBG. This public hearing addresses the General Allocation portion of CDBG. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Conduct the public hearing to provide information regarding the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and receive public testimony. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine no application will be considered whatever the circumstances and do not conduct the hearing. 2. Determine a different date is more appropriate for the hearing and direct staff to readvertise for the desired date. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Appropriation Requested: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Acct. No.: N/A Public Hearing notice published on the March 9 in the Ukiah Daily Journal N/A Michael F. Harris, AICP, Assistant City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager None APPROVED" ~ Candace Horsley, Ci~ Manager COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 19, 1997 PAGE 2 The Community Development Block Grant Program is a federal funding source administered in California by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). There are three allocations within the Program: Economic Development, Planning /Technical Assistance, and General and Native American. In the past the City has been awarded grants in the Planning/Technical Assistance component and has considered applications for Economic Development. During the current CDBG funding cycle there is approximately $25 million available for distribution statewide. $800,000 is the maximum award for any single jurisdiction under both the General and Economic Development components. $500,000 is the maximum per application per year for either component. The projects applied for must benefit persons in the Targeted Income Group (TIG) as defined by HCD. TIG generally encompasses individuals or families with income levels of very Iow (30-50% of County median), Iow (51-80% of County median), and moderate (81-120% of County median). Eligible activities include Housing, new construction and rehabilitation, Community Facilities and Public Services, and Public Works. As stated earlier in this report, this public hearing is for public input and information only; no City Council action, other than to conduct the hearing, is required or recommended. rnfh:asrcc97 0319CDBG AGENDA SUMARY ITEM NO. 7b DATE: March 19, 1997 REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ZONING MAP TO REZONE 19 LOTS IN THE MISCELLANEOUS AREA NO. 3 GENERAL PLAN REZONING AREA SUMMARY: In December of 1995, the City Council formally adopted a new General Plan for the City. One of the first tasks of implementing the new General Plan is to revise ordinances and other regulatory "tools" to be consistent with the Plan. Accordingly, over the past year, staff has initiated a series of zoning map and ordinance revisions based upon the direction provided in the new General Plan. Phase No. 8(C) of the city-wide General Plan rezoning program involves 19 lots situated in what is referred to as the Miscellaneous Area No. 3 rezoning area (see map attached to the draft ordinance). This rezoning area involves the potential rezoning of 25 parcels from "R-I" (Single Family Residential) to "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) generally located along Luce Avenue between Dora Avenue and State Street, and along the east side of South Street between Luce Avenue and Observatory Avenue; 19 parcels from (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Introduce by title only the ordinance amending the City Zoning Map rezoning 19 lots in the Miscellaneous Area No. 3 General Plan rezoning area. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the proposed ordinance, and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: All affected and adjoining property owners duly noticed Requested by: Planning Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Senior Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Ordinance amending the City Zoning Map 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 26, 1997 3. Planning Commission Minutes, dated February 26, 1997 APPROVED: candace Ho~'~ley~ (~ity~a 1 nager "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) to "R-3" generally located along Observatory Avenue between Dora Street and South Street; and 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) located at 202 Washington Avenue. Planning Commission Hearing On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and discussed the issues concerning the possible rezoning actions. After public testimony and considerable discussion, the Commission deviated from the General Plan on a significant number of the parcels, and is recommending that only 19 of the 45 parcels be rezoned consistent with their new General Plan Land Use Designations. They are recommending that the remaining 26 lots be included in the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning package for consideration at the conclusion of the City-wide rezoning program. The rezoning groupings, and the Planning Commission's recommendations are discussed below. ITEM #1: R-1 to R-3 These 25 lots are situated along both sides of Luce Avenue, range in size from approximately 3,800 to 11,700 square feet, and are exclusively developed with single family residences. The immediate neighborhood surrounding the subject lots contains a mix of land uses including single family residences, apartment buildings, medical offices, churches, schools, and commercial businesses. Based upon the generally small size of the subject lots, and the stable and well maintained nature of this single family residential neighborhood, the Planning Commission concluded that the likelihood of these houses being demolished in favor of higher density development within the next 10-20 years is remote. Accordingly, they found that the rezoning of these lots from "R-I" to "R-3" was inappropriate, and therefore they are recommending a~ainst this action. Staff supports this recommendation. If the City Council agrees with this recommendation, these parcels will be included in the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning project at the conclusion of the Citywide rezoning program. ITEM #2: R-2 to R-3 These 19 lots are situated along both sides of Observatory Avenue, and range in size from approximately 7,000 to 15,000 square feet. 15 of the lots are developed with high density dwelling units, while 2 have duplex structures, and 2 are developed with single family residences. Surrounding land uses include multiple family residential, medical offices, and single family residential. The 4 large parcels south of the subject lots, and west of Mulberry Street are currently zoned "R-3." Based upon the number of lots with existing high density residential development, and the adjacent high density residential developments to the south and east, the Planning Commission recommends that these lots be rezoned from "R-2" to "R-3." Staff supports this recommendation. ITEM #3: R-3 to C-N This 8,800 square foot lot is located at 202 Washington Avenue and is developed with a 900 square foot single family residence and small rental cottage. Surrounding land uses include single and multiple family residential. The Brookside Retirement Home is adjacent to the west, and is zoned "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial). The 5 parcels to the east along Washington Avenue are all zoned "R-3." It appears that this lot, which protrudes into the "C-N" classified Brookside Retirement Home parcel to the west (see attached map), was designated Commercial in the General Plan as a means of "squaring-off" the commercial land patterning along Dora Street. It is doubtful that the existing land use on the lot, or the surrounding existing land uses were evaluated in detail when the Commercial Land Use Designation was applied. Based upon the existing surrounding land uses, and the residential nature of this portion of Washington Avenue, the Planning Commission concluded that the Commercial Land Use Designation is inappropriate for this parcel, and therefore recommends against this rezoning action. Staff supports this recommendation. It should be noted that the property owner, and a number of surrounding property owners have expressed opposition to rezoning this parcel to "C-N." If the City Council agrees with this recommendation, these parcels will be included in the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning project at the conclusion of the Citywide rezoning program. CONCLUSIONS The newly adopted City General Plan provides new Land Use Designations for a number of properties in the Miscellaneous Area No. 3 rezoning area of the community. The purpose of redesignating some properties is to acknowledge and protect important existing land uses, and to help facilitate the evolution of land uses that have become out of context with their surroundings. The Planning Commission supports a number of the rezonings, but recommends against others, because of existing development, or concerns about the preservation of neighborhood character. Accordingly, they are recommending 19 of the 45 rezoning actions. The attached ordinance reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 9009 of the Ukiah City Code, the Official Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah is amended to change the zoning on 19 parcels in the Miscellaneous Area No. 3 rezoning area of the community as identified in the General Plan Rezoning Program. Specifically, the City Zoning Map is amended to rezone 19 parcels from "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) to "R-3" (General Multiple Residential). The listing of the specific parcels involved in this rezoning action, along with detailed rezoning information is attached as Exhibit "A." SECTION 'I'VVO This ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. SECTION THREE This rezoning action and amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the City of Ukiah is necessary to bring the zoning for the subject properties listed in Exhibit "A" into conformance with the new General Plan adopted on December 6, 1995. SECTION FOUR This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption. Introduced by title only on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: , by the following roll call vote: Passed and adopted on , by the following role call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Sheridan Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" Miscellaneous Area No. 3 Rezoning Project (96-52c) Assessor's Current General Plan New Parcel No. Zoning Designation Zoning 3-073-10 3-073-11 3-073-15 3-073-16 3-073-17 3-073-18 3-073-19 3-130-48 3-130-49 R-2 HDR R-3 3-590-1 3-590-3 3-590-4 3-590-5 3-590-6 3-590-7 3-590-8 3-590-10 3-590-11 3-590-12 EXHIBIT "A" - Page 1 of 2 MISCELLANEOUS REZONING AREA NO. 3 Retain R-1 rather than rezone to R-3 Rezone from R-2 to R-3 Retain R-3 rather than rezone to .WA SHING ~'ON A V~.. Retain R-1 rather than rezone to R-3 EXHIBIT 'A" - Page 2 of 2 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: _ ,, DATE: _ 7D. 2-26-97 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: February 26, 1997 City of Ukiah Planning Commission City of Ukiah Planning Department Miscellaneous #3 Rezoning Project (96-52c) City of Ukiah PROJECT SUMMARY: Phase No. 8(c) of the city-wide General Plan rezoning program involves 45 lots situated in what is referred to as the Miscellaneous #3 rezoning area (see map attached to draft ordinance). This portion of the community is comprised of single and multiple family residential zoning classifications. The General Plan assigns medium and high density residential, and commercial land use designations to parcels in the Miscellaneous #3 rezoning area. These designations have been assigned to reflect existing development, to facilitate the logical evolution of inappropriate land uses, and to guide the development of existing vacant land. 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 Miscellaneous #3 rezoning area is generally bounded by Luce Avenue on the North, Washington Avenue on the south, Dora Street on the west, and South State Street on the east. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council APPROVAL of the rezonings and ADOPTION of the ordinance amending the City Zoning Map. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION' The City Council has adopted a programmatic Negative Declaration for the General Plan rezoning project. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: "HDR" (High Density Residential), and "C" (Commercial). ZONING DISTRICT: "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential), "R-3" (General Multiple Residential), and "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project involves the rezoning of 25 parcels from "R-I" (Single Family I~esidential) to "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) generally located along Luce Avenue between Dora Avenue and State Street, and along the east side of South Street between Luce Avenue and Observatory Avenue; 19 parcels from "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) to "R-3" generally located along Observatory Avenue between Dora Street and South Street; and 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) located at 202 Washington Avenue. A map(s) indicating the locations of the subject properties, and their current and proposed zoning is included with the attached draft ordinance. STAFF ANALYSIS: The parcels proposed to be rezoned have been grouped according to what the existing and proposed zoning classifications are, as described in the project description above. ITEM #1: R-1 to R-3 These 25 lots range in size from approximately 3,800 to 11,700 square feet, and are exclusively developed with single family residences. The immediate neighborhood surrounding the subject lots contains a mix of land uses including single family residences, apartment buildings, medical offices, churches, schools, and commercial businesses. These lots are included in a large swath of land designated High Density Residential ("HDR") in the new General Plan. Existing multiple family residential developments are situated adjacent to the north and south of the subject lots, and it appears that the reason for the "HDR" Land Use Designation was the perceived potential for these properties to evolve or redevelop from single to multiple family residential development within the next 20 years. Based upon the generally small size of the subject lots, and the stable and well maintained nature of this single family residential neighborhood, staff is able to conclude that the likelihood of houses being demolished in favor of higher density development within the next 10-20 years is remote. Accordingly, we find that the rezoning of these lots from "R-I" to "R-3" is inappropriate, and therefore recommend against this action. ITEM #2: R-2 to R-3 These 19 lots are situated along both sides of Observatory Avenue, and range in size from approximately 7,000 to 15,000 square feet. 15 of the lots are developed with high density dwelling units, while 2 have duplex structures, and 2 are developed with single family residences. Surrounding land uses include multiple family residential, medical offices, and single family residential. The 4 large parcels south of the subject lots, and west of Mulberq) Street are currently zoned "R-3." Based upon the number of lots with existing high density residential development, and the adjacent high density residential developments to the south and east, staff is able to conclude that the "R-3" zoning classification makes sense for these lots. Additionally, commercial land uses, medical offices, schools, and churches are within walking distance of the subject lots, and major public transportation routes are located along nearby Dora and State Streets. Accordingly, staff recommends that these lots be rezoned from "R-2" to "R-3." ITEM #3: R-3 to C-N This 8,800 square foot lot is located at 202 Washington Avenue and is developed with a 900 square foot single family residence and small rental cottage. Surrounding land uses include single and multiple family residential. The Brookside Retirement Home is adjacent to the west, and is zoned "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial). The 5 parcels to the east along Washington Avenue are all zoned "R-3." It appears that this lot, which protrudes into the "C-N" classified Brookside Retirement Home parcel to the west (see attached map), was designated Commercial in the General Plan as a means of"squaring-off" the commercial land patterning along Dora Street. It is doubtful that the existing land use on the lot, or the surrounding existing land uses were evaluated in detail when the Commercial Land Use Designation was applied. While there are commercial land uses along Washington Avenue, they are limited to the eastern end near South State Street. In the immediate vicinity of the subject lot, the land uses are predominantly residential, and the "feel" of the neighborhood from mid-block west to the Dora Street intersection is distinctly residential. Based upon the existing surrounding land uses, and the residential nature of this portion of Washington Avenue, staff is able to conclude that the Commercial Land Use Designation is inappropriate for this parcel, and therefore recommends a~ainst this -- rezoning action. ZONING DISTRICT INFORMATION ZONING DISTRICT R-1 R-2 MINIMUM LOT SIZE 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot DENSITY REQUIREMENT 1 unit per 6,000 square feet (7 units per acre) 1 unit per 3,000 square feet (14 units per acre) R-3 6,000 / 7,000 on a corner lot 1 unit per 1,500 square feet (28 units per acre) C-1 None None C-N 7,000 1 unit per 7,000 square feet CONCLUSIONS: The newly adopted City General Plan provides new Land Use Designations for a number of properties in the Miscellaneous #3 rezoning area of the community. The purpose of redesignating some properties is to acknowledge and protect important existing land uses, and to help facilitate the evolution of land uses that have become out of context with their surroundings. Staff supports a number of the rezonings, but recommends against others, because of existing development, or concerns about the preservation of neighborhood character. Accordingly, staff is recommending 19 of the 45 rezoning actions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Ordinance Amending the City Zoning Map 2. Letter/petition received from various property owners, concerning 202 Washington Avenue, dated February 16, 1997 3. Letter received from Mr. John Pittman, dated February 17, 1997 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: ~'ar s 'S~ump,"'Sen~ner irector MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION February 26, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT Eric Larson Joe Chiles Mike Correll Jennifer Puser Judy Pruden, Chairman ,MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Charles Stump, Senior Planner Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Marge Giuntoli, Recording Secretary OTHERS PRESENT Tom Brown Tori Brown Peter Bucklin Pete Carter Glen Donalson Wayne Fackrell Kate Gould Mike Heaney Jim McGrath Sue Nomura Dennis O'Keefe Cathy Pacini Ida Pittman Tiffany Reynolds Warren Sawyers Chuck Shaw Mike Shutz Pat Stefani Dean Thornquist The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Judy Pruden at 7:02 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 Commissioners and determined each had made the required site visits. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -January 22, 1997 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Con'ell, it was carried by the following roll call vote to approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 22, 1997, as amended: Commissioner Larson made the following correction: Page 3, Paragra_eh 7. 1st Sentence. amend to read: "Mr. Kennedy stated Condition #~ called for relocating the signal either at Scott or Norton to Clara and State Streets." MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 February 26, t997 Discussion followed regarding the next to the last sentence in Paragraph 8, Page 17, wherein it was determined that although Mr. Dolan "noted the Commission's actions to upzone Empire Gardens to an R-2 are not going to help the affordable housing, especially in areas that can easily be accessed by walking and handicap access," Mr. Dolan mispoke and the action was not actually taken by the Planning Commission. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson,.Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. Chairman Pruden explained that beginning with this meeting, there would be an informational packet regarding agendized items available for use by the audience, to allow for a more complete understanding of the issues being discussed. This packet will be located, with additional copies of the agenda and "draft" minutes, in the plastic holders to the right of the Council Chamber's entrance, and is to remain for use in the Chamber only. $. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one came forward. 6. APPEAL PROCESS Chairman Pruden read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is March 10, 1997. 7, PROJECT REVIEW Use Permit Application No. 97-06, as submitted by Tori Brown, to allow an expansion of an existing _olayground at a preschool/daycare facility by 6,017 square feet and to allow the number of children permitted to use the playground to be increased from 14 to 48, on a parcel located in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District, at 465 Luce Avenue (Assessor Parcel No. 003-061-04 & 22). Associate Planner Lohse provided an overview of the written staff report, including a synopsis of the history for Use Permit No. 94-28 for the Little Friends Preschool and Day Care Center, approved by the Planning Commission on October 26, 1994. The Conditions of Approval for this permit required the approval of a parking plan for school use, a maximum occupancy of 50 children and seven employees, and a maximum of 14 children at one time using the playground between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Mondays through Fridays. The proposed Use Permit has been applied for to allow the center to use a second playground area that was installed in violation of the original Use Permit's conditions. This playground currently contains a playset and open areas, and the site plan submitted with the application indicates that a large lawn area surrounded by a bike path would be installed in the future. The applicant has also requested that Condition No. 4 of Use Permit No. 94-28 be modified to allow the minimum number of children that are permitted to use the playground to be increased from 14 to 30 children dudng regular school operations, and from 14 to 48 children during meals and special group activities. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 February 26, 1997 Mr. Lohse further advised that staff reviewed the project and determined that the proposed minor expansion of the playground facilities would be consistent with the use and development standards that could be applied to preschool/daycare uses in the R-1 Zoning District. Staff also reviewed other potential impacts examined in its analysis for the previously approved use permit and determined that potential impacts associated with traffic and parking would not be exacerbated by the approval of this project. Planning staff is, however, concerned with the potential for increased noise levels on the site, particularly those caused by children using the playground facilities. Although there is no evidence that the increased noise levels would cause persons injury or other health problems, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the anticipated noise increases from additional children using existing and proposed playground areas would cause substantial nuisance impacts for residents on adjoining parcels. It is possible that solid sound walls or other noise attenuation measures could be constructed by the applicant to mitigate these impacts, but it is likely that the required height and bulk of these structures would be inconsistent with development standards for the R-1 Zoning District. Therefore, the Planning Department recommends that the proposed playground expansion and allowance for additional children on playground areas be denied. Commissioner Larson commented regarding the accuracy of the traffic analysis performed for the project, clarified that the enrollment would be 48 children and 7 staff on the premises at any one time, and inquired if the possibility existed that the total enrollment of 50 could actually be 100 part- time children. Discussion followed wherein it was noted the current Use Permit states "50 children," and there is no increase projected. Theoretically there could be more than 50 children enrolled if some were part-time; Ms. Brown is licensed for 50 children. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:15 p.m. Wayne Fackrell, 474 Observatory Avenue, stated the playground was not on the original use permit, and that he was not opposed to day care facilities, but was opposed to having them in an R-1 residential neighborhood. He further stated that having 48 children in his back yard was unacceptable to him, and that he had previously counted 27 children on the playground at one time. The neighbors are in opposition to the increased noise level, and with the activities at the church, there is no peace and quiet at any time. He wants it stopped. Mike Heaney, 476 Observatory Avenue, stated he resided adjacent to the new playground area. There are never only 14 children on the playground, they are still there after 5:30 p.m., and create constant noise. The rules must be adhered to. Glen Donalson, 463 Luce Avenue, referenced his letter, and stated his property was next to and in front of the church property. He noted there is a lot of traffic during the noon hour and in the late afternoon, and reiterated the previous speakers' comments. The day care has gone as far as it should go in an R-1 neighborhood. Warren Sawyers, 1081 Helen Avenue, stated originally the real injustice of the situation was perpetrated by the Planning Commissioners; there is no buffer zone between people's private MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page $ February 26, 1997 Page 2 March 19, 1997 Report on the Acquisition of Flexible Crack Sealant Bid Tabulation - Flexible Crack Sealant Vendor Bid Amount Total Bid (w/o tax & discount) Tri-American, Inc. Milpitas, CA $0.29 per pound $7,516.80 Edward R. Bacon Co., Inc. Sacramento, CA $0.29 per pound $7,516.80 Special Asphalt Products Portland, OR $0.295 per pound $7,646.4O property and the playground area. The noise factor is a major criteria, and the Planning Commission should never have approved the use permit to begin with. Although he does not disagree with the day care venture, he opposes the expansion because of the noise factor. Sue Nomura, 3800 North State Street, #94, stated she was a parent who utilized the day care center, and that usually her children are the last to be picked up. She has often found them waiting for her inside the building when she comes to get them at 5:00 p.m. Tom Brown, 1345 Laurel Avenue, representing his wife, applicant Tod Brown, stated that the day care is a non-profit organization. They are attempting to eliminate having 14 children on the playground on a rotating basis for the entire day, and instead allow all of the children outside at one time. Thus there will be minimal times when there is noise, rather than constant noise all day long. It was his understanding they had use of the lawn area previously; if an additional use permit is necessary, they will get it. They are not asking for more enrollment; the set volume is fine for them. They simply want to have all the children out at one time, with peace and quiet in between. The Commissioners queried the applicant regarding the structure on the map by the lawn area, how they limit the number of children to 14 on the playground at one time, whether the expansion would mean a reduction in the number of hours children would be outside, and if the use permit limited enrollment to 50 children and 7 staff. Mr. Brown replied the structure in question is a piece of wooden playground equipment with slides and bars. The children are limited by their class structure, and staff has resolved the playground control issues that existed. He reiterated they are attempting to create a good, safe place for children, with all of them on the playground at the same time, similar to regular school recesses. He further stated that people are misunderstanding that they want to increase their enrollment from 14 to 48 children; they already have the 48 children and simply want to consolidate the time they are outside. The children are presently supervised under a rotating staff of 5 people, with 3 typically present at any one time. The Commissioners continued to query the applicant regarding playground schedules, the number of actual hours per day the children would be outside, other groups who use the facility, and the number of preschoolers at the center during normal school hours of 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Mr. Brown replied there was no set schedule yet planned for the increased number of children on the playground, but that they would be outside approximately 4 hours a day, including lunch, snack and play times. After 5:30 p.m., the church, which houses the facility, has their own activities. There are approximately 20 to 25 preschoolers in attendance dudng school hours, with 15 children returning to the facility after school. Pastor Dean Thornquist, representing Calvary Baptist Church, asked for clarification of the issue they were addressing. Mr. Lohse replied the Commission was addressing the expansion of the facilities, and whether the number of children that can use the playground at any one time can be increased. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 * February 26, 1997 Pastor Thornquist stated the church owns property that protrudes toward Helen Avenue which they use for parking for approximately 100 vehicles and a traffic turnaround; much of the traffic does not come through the church area. On the plot plan the parking spaces numbered 21 to 32, between the buildings, are blocked with cones so the preschoolers can ride their bikes in that area. This will cut down considerably on the back noise. Commissioner Larson clarified that the game square painted on the driveway was used by the church. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:40 p.m. Chairman Pruden stated she was on the Planning Commission in 1994 when the original use permit was approved, and that the neighborhood voiced no objections at that time. Ms. Brown made a great many promises to the Planning Commission, one of them being that she would be a good neighbor and work out all problems with the neighborhood regarding the day care. Although there was no negative input two years ago, in the space of 28 months Ms. Brown has managed to alienate several blocks of neighbors. Chairman Pruden expressed her concern and stated she felt Ms. Brown had not kept her word to the Planning Commission that she gave 2 years ago, and is uncertain why. She takes the 4 pages of petition signatures from the neighbors seriously. Upon visiting the site recently at 7:45 a.m., she found the entire neighborhood awake from this activity; there were cars going, doors slamming, and dogs barking. This is not a quiet project, and that is why there are use permits. Use permits are conditional upon being a good neighbor. The promises given to staff and the Planning Commission at the time of the original use permit have not been honored. Commissioner Chiles stated the type of facilities Ms. Brown uses are usually limited to 12 children in a residential area, and he would not have approved the odginal use permit if he had been on the Commission at that time. He does not support the expansion, although he understands her need to have the children together at the lunch hour. What Chairman Pruden has said regarding the day care's impact on the neighborhood causes him to believe the situation should not become any worse. Commissioner Puser stated she sympathized with the applicant, but that it seems as if a significant number of the neighbors are impacted by the noise, and that the location of the day care center for that number of children appears to present a problem in this particular residential area. Commissioner Correli commented he thought the facilities were wonderful, but were in the wrong location in an R-1 zoning area. Commissioner Larson stated he tended to agree with Commissioner Chiles in that day care facilities in residential areas should be limited to a small number of children. However, it was not limited previously, and the Browns have invested a lot of time and money in this center that is not compatible with their neighbors. He recommended the Commissioners act to "deny without prejudice," which would allow the applicant to work out a solution that is acceptable to the neighborhood, instead of involving the City at this point. If they can find a way to impact the neighborhood less intensely with a specific plan for mitigations of the noise problem, the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 February 26, 1997 Commission could reconsider this application. If the Commissioners act to deny the project, the only option open to the applicant is to appeal to the City Council. Chairman Pruden addressed the audience, stating that a use permit is conditional upon being a good neighbor. The people have made their feelings very clear that this project is a problem in their neighborhood, and it would behoove the applicant to resolve the problems. This petition is extensive and far-reaching. If the neighborhood continues to have problems, they have the legal right to come forward for a revocation hearing, which revokes the use permit and removes the ability to do this business in this location. That is one of the things that can occur when the use has demonstrated that it is not compatible to the neighborhood. Senior Planner Stump stated that revocation of the use permit would be predicated on a violation of said permit, and that to date staff has been unable to identify actual violations. Revocation would require detailed work and clear, documentable violation of the use permit. Chairman Pruden stated the neighborhood has made the intent clear that if they have to do that to solve the problem, they will. It was her hope that the applicant understands the seriousness of the neighbors' concerns. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to deny without prejudice Use Permit Application No. 97-06, as submitted by Tori Brown, and that within a 6 month time frame the applicant can return, at no financial cost, with a potential solution before the Planning Commission. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. 7B. Ordinance Amendment Ap_olication No. 97-02, as submitted by Robert H. Lee and Associates, to allow the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance {No. 979) to be amended by the deletion of language that excludes drive-thru restaurants from the list of allowed uses for properties designated as Highway Commercial, on property located at 1105 Airport Park Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 180-070-36. Associate Planner Lohse reviewed the written staff report, and advised that Tentative Minor Subdivision Map No. 97-04 had been approved by the City Engineer; however, the parcel map has not been received and as of this date the site still remains as one parcel. Discussion followed regarding C-2 zoning, and the assumption that a sit-down and a drive-thru restaurant would have the same traffic numbers and thus the same impact fees. Staff noted that a drive-thru restaurant would generate more traffic, but that the fee structures for the capital improvement program for the Airport Industrial Park had not been established because the fee had not been determined by the City Council. In buildout of the Park, a drive-thru restaurant would not erode the levels of service at the intersection any more than a sit-down restaurant. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 February 26, 1997 Commissioner Puser inquired regarding the recommendation from the Air Quality Management Board. Mr. Lohse replied the Board is generally opposed to all drive-thru operations because of their contention that cars idling in drive-thru lanes generate more pollutants. However, their analysis is incomplete and the information is unsubstantiated. When asked if they were prepared to oppose all drive-thru lanes, and not just for this project, the Board replied they were not prepared to say that at this time. Senior Planner Stump commented that the Commission knows there was a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park, and that the EIR clearly stated there would naturally be air impacts. A series of mitigations was developed for air quality impacts resulting from buildout of the Park, and they have been applied to this project. The EIR assumed larger retail commercial development than has actually happened. Commissioner Larson commented he was curious how this prohibition came about and when it was included in this zone. Mr. Stump replied it had been an unwritten City Council policy, without any adopted law or regulation, not to have drive-thrus. It was not until the Ordinance was amended in August, 1995, that the unwritten policy was codified. The desire has always been for a sit-down restaurant on this site; the current property owner has unsuccessfully attempted for two years to secure one. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 8:tl p.m. Chuck Shaw, Real Estate Manager for Jack-In-The-Box Restaurants, briefly reviewed the proposed project, and stated there was a recent study showing that automobiles with catalytic converters that idled for 7 to 10 minutes at drive-thrus generally released less pollution than restarted parked vehicles. In response to queries from the Commissioners, Mr. Shaw further stated his company is seeking to target a blended population, both local and highway, and that they do not engage in non drive-thru facilities, whereas some of the other fast food companies will franchise for walk-up facilities, such as are contained in minimarts. Jack-In-The-Box accommodates seating for 90 in their facility, so that people who do not wish to avail themselves of the drive-thru feature can dine leisurely. Peter Bucklin, PMB Development Co., applauded staff for their input, which has culminated in a viable, appropriate development for the area, given the proximity to the freeway and the established retail ventures. Although he is aware of the preference for a sit-down restaurant and has contacted over 100 companies supplying that service, the site and market are not sufficient to gain their interest; the needs are not there. The proposed uses are the best for that particular location and for the existing marketplace. The Commissioners queried Mr. Bucklin regarding what things were lacking for a sit-down restaurant, single counter franchise operations within minimarts, and if the gas station will be constructed if the drive-thru restaurant is not approved. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 February 26, 1997 Mr. Bucklin replied the demographics of the Ukiah Valley do not support the volume needed by a sit-down restaurant. The population base must be at least 75,000; the additional highway traffic is not enough. Fast food operations contained within convenience stores/minimarts are commonly known as "infills." They are not installed with the purpose of replacing a full drive-thru, and there are usually other drive-thrus in the immediate vicinity. He further replied that the construction of the proposed gas station is critical to this project; they have exhausted all other variations. The configuration and size of the site only allow a certain combination of uses. Commissioner Larson clarified that Wal-Mart was the previous owner of the property, and that it was purchased with the drive-thru restriction in place. Mr. Shaw commented that many of the existing quick service restaurants, while freeway oriented, are also adjacent to retail generation uses. The cost of development for fuel operators is becoming extremely expensive, and they are looking for an opportunity to augment their income. Many dealers have augmented that income with other food type uses, which they franchise. Mike Shutz, Park Place, Ukiah, inquired of staff if, prior to this applicant, other people requiring a drive-thru on their establishment had asked to purchase this property. He further inquired if there had ever been a survey attempt to indicate or prove to any of the sit-down restaurants that our community would support this type of operation, instead of going the opposite way of asking if they would come here, but not state the reasons for asking. Mr. Stump replied that in his experience, he was only approached by Jack-In-The-Box in terms of drive-thru restaurants. Although he was unaware of any survey, he and Planning Director Sawyer had fielded calls the past three years from interested sit-down restaurant people, and attempted not only to answer their inquiries regarding population figures but informed them that such a restaurant is needed in this community and is the preference of the City Council. Discussion followed regarding drive-thru restaurants and the reality of the marketplace. It was noted that this application was not made arbitrarily, and that the proposed location is a logical place for this type of use, not an impact to local residents, and not placed in an area to attempt to capture a competitor's business. Pete Carter, 191 Cherry Street, stated he was not in favor of the project. There used to be a service station at every corner, and now it looks as if there will be a drive-thru restaurant at every corner. The Ordinance should remain as it is. Mr. Bucklin .commented on the domino effect of development, and stated that this project provides services and is the best use for the site. With the continuation of the retail business development to the south, the possibility of a dinner house may be "just around the corner." There is a much higher probability of securing a dinner establishment with the development of the corner offering services. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:45 p.m. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 February 26, 1997 Commissioner Chiles clarified that the project had been reviewed by the City's Public Safety Department, stated he agreed with staff that this area is highway commercial, and voiced his support of the amendment. Commissioner Puser stated she was opposed to the amendment, because if a dinner house is "just around the corner," then they should wait for the dinner house; there is no need for another fast food restaurant. It is unfortunate that the people who bought the property were not aware of the exclusion. Drive-thru types of businesses promote an automobile culture. Commissioner Correll stated he agreed with staff regarding the lOcation for this project. Although he is not particularly excited about a drive-thru restaurant, he agrees it is actually a good site for this particular application and supports the amendment. Commissioner Larson stated that staff's argument that drive-thru facilities are legitimate or allowed uses in other highway commercial zones does not justify changing this particular piece of property. It begs the question whether drive-thrus are necessary; in his opinion they do not enhance the community. The entire issue of drive-thru restaurants and the type of market it creates has to be examined. He further stated he questioned the domino development theory. If the property remains vacant, the increasing retail market ventures to the south may help the chances for a sit-down restaurant on the site. He is not in favor of reactive planning, that is, reacting to a market situation rather than to what is good land use planning in this community. He does not support a drive-thru use on this parcel. Chairman Pruden stated she did not like the site development plan and therefore could not approve the project. There have been too many amendments for site development at the Park, which limits any sense of future planning. She would prefer to see a regular restaurant at that location, and has a concern about another drive-thru there. Philosophically, amending the planned development at the Park every time there is a new project has got to be stopped, and she cannot support another amendment. Mr. Stump reviewed what he had determined to be the Commissioners' findings in support of their decision. He urged them not to make a finding related to the notion that they do not want to amend the Planned Development Ordinance; the property owners have the right to pursue amending it. If the amendment were supported, changes could be made to the site plan if the Commission considers it unacceptable. He suggested that, for the benefit of the applicants, the Commissioners state their findings/reasons supporting their conclusions. Chairman Pruden referenced staff's findings in their report, and stated she was unable to find a compelling reason or a rational, logical explanation to amend the Ordinance; there is no compelling argument for that action. Although she is in agreement that a restaurant at that location is consistent with highway oriented commercial, she does not believe that a drive-thru operation is the only compatible alternative. Mr. Stump stated that the General Plan designates the property as Master Plan area, and the adopted Planned Development Ordinance functions as the Master Plan. The highway commercial designation in the PD Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. Although the City Council will MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 February 26, 1997 /7 be required to make their own findings regarding the amendment, he suggested the Commissioners refine their reasons for the Council's benefit. Commissioner Larson stated he took issue with the statement that the Commission has to make findings to expand the land use; it is not their obligation. They do not have to 'arrive at findings to justify observations. Chairman Pruden inquired regarding the process for proceeding with the next agenda item of site development discussion, and whether the preference was to complete the discussion now, or at a later date, should the Council approve the Ordinance amendment. Mr. Stump suggested the discussion occur as scheduled to give the City Council the benefit of that discussion. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carded by the following roll call vote, to,deny Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02, based on the reasons discussed above. AYES: Commissioners Larson, Puser, and Chairman Pruden. NOES: Commissioners Chiles and Correll. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. RECESS: 9:06 p.m. RECONVENE: 9:20 p.m. 7C. Site Development Permit Application No 97-03, as submitted by Robert H. Lee and Associates, to allow the construction of an auto service station and convenience store, a drive-thru restaurant and a thirty-foot high pole sign on a 1.38 acre parcel located in a portion of the Airport Industrial Park designated for Highway Commercial land uses in the AlP Planned Development Ordi.n..ance (No. 979). on property located at 1105 Airport Park Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 180-070-36. Senior Planner Stump reiterated that the Planning Commission had voted to recommend denial of the amendment to the AlP Planned Developed Ordinance, but would discuss Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 in the event the City Council approved said amendment. Associate Planner Lohse dispensed with the lengthy staff report, and advised that the proposed Permit would allow the commercial development of the site, including a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru window and an auto service station with six pump islands, a convenience store, and a car wash. The applicants have also requested approval of a 200 square foot pole sign with a proposed maximum height of 30 feet. He further advised that the traffic analysis showed the project would increase traffic by 150 trips per day; however, that level is not sufficient to be mitigated. Staff does not recommend approval of the pole sign, but does support the majority of the sign program. In past projects, the City Council has allowed larger than normal building signage rather than pole signs. The standard sign code provisions prohibit the sign from being viewed from the freeway. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 February 26, 1997 The Commissioners queried staff regarding bicycle lanes, alternatives to the pole sign, access along Airport Park Boulevard, and staffs concerns regarding the driveway location by to the intersection. Staff replied the Ordinance requires Class 3 bicycle lanes and that Talmage Road is targeted for bike lanes in the future. Most of the buildings in the Park have larger signs on the set back buildings. Staff is. proposing elimination of the pole sign. There are still concerns regarding the access. Discussion followed relative to the potentially hazardous situations at the intersection, including the possibility of more accidents due to increased traffic, and sight blockage caused by the redwood trees. Staff explained that the ingress and egress into the Wal-Mart area on the south was for the purpose of a secondary access to provide direct access to the Wal-Mart site and to provide a more reasonable alternative to turning left on Airport Park Boulevard. The existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk would be moved, together with the landscaping, which will be replaced to conceal the car wash. There are certain restrictions on the site because the Ordinance does not permit any entrances on Talmage; however, drivers will have three options to exit. Staff noted that the applicants believe the circulation plan, while not optimum, will work for them. Commissioner Chiles noted he would like to see more windows in the buildings to alleviate the "big box" look. Further discussion followed relative to parking, with staff noting that the parking lots conform with the parking standards, with allowed back-up space. Staff clarified the location of the property line. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:44 p.m. Peter Bucklin, PMB Development Co., stated they agreed with the findings and staff recommendations and mitigations, with the exception of the pole sign. He expressed disappointment with the Commission's earlier action on the Ordinance amendment, and is uncertain of what other options exist, if any. The Commission queried Mr. Bucklin regarding the necessary easements, whether the gas station will be in private hands, and the responsibility for maintenance of the landscaping and parking medians. Mr. Bucklin assured the Commissioners they had secured all the required easements, that the station will be a Shell station operated by Golden Gate Petroleum and that both Jack-In-The-Box and Mr. O'Keefe's organization would be responsible for the maintenance of the medians. Chuck Shaw, Jack-In-The-Box Restaurants, stated they will remove the neon from the building and reserve the opportunity to work with staff on the matter of the sign, which is necessary since the highway interchange and the existing buildings hide the site. He does not have an alternative design for the sign at this time. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 February 26, 1997 Discussion followed regarding the concrete sign for the Redwood Business Park, located at the corner of Talmage Road and Airport Park Boulevard. It was determined that the sign will probably be removed; however, Mr. Akerstrom indicated to staff that he does have an easement for it. The Commission could recommend that landscaping be done around the sign. Further discussion followed regarding outdoor seating for the restaurant, wherein it was noted that Jack-In-The-Box traditionally offers outdoor seating for their customers, depending on the parking ratio and the site plan. For this site, the restaurant could probably accommodate 24 seating areas consisting of polished aggregate concrete furniture with umbrellas. Staff noted they would like to see park benches and seating over the entire site, not just for dining. Chairman Pruden inquired regarding the architecture, including the 3 triangular parapets which rise up above the building. She further inquired regarding the corporate colors on the building design. Mr. Shaw replied the parapets were designed both as a portion of the normal architecture and to blend with the existing buildings in the Park. The standard colors are a charcoal gray mansard roof, and a white building with red accent colors and red signs with white lettering. Chairman Pruden asked if Mr. Shaw were amenable to a few changes in the color scheme, and voiced her dislike of the stark white on the building, preferring instead an off-white or softened white color. Mr. Shaw replied he was unable to answer, because the colors were a part of the overall development design. However, he could approach management with the request. Discussion followed regarding location of the free standing sign, wherein it was noted that if the signage is to be compromised from the applicant's request, frequently Jack-In-The-Box will raise a balloon to bring to staff's attention what is actually visible from the freeway. Dennis O'Keefe, President of Golden Gate Petroleum, stated he concurs with staff findings with the exception of the signage; it is his opinion that it is important to have visibility from the freeway. Referencing the Commission's previous action on the Ordinance amendment, he alleged that his company felt a strong compatibility with Jack-In-The-Box. In addition, their experience has been that car washes complement the gasoline business, and are necessary to offset and pay for the tremendous investments that are required. He further stated that Golden Gate Petroleum represents Shell Oil in certain areas. They have formed a joint venture with Shell, so this particular site would be owned and operated by the joint venture, Golden Gate Holdings. Chairman Pruden inquired relative to where the customers would pay, voiced her concerns regarding the safety of people having to cross the main road to pay for their gas, and asked if the applicants would be willing to have a cashier located near the center of the pumps. Discussion followed regarding the circulation plan on the site. It was noted that the project is designed for efficiency, with the bulk of the customers paying at the pump. Larger vehicles such as motorhomes and trailers will use the outside fueling lanes, and exit accordingly. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 February 26, 1997 Chairman Pruden commented that the colors on the convenience store are not coordinated with the colors on Jack-In-The-Box, and noted that in some areas the chain businesses have changed their corporate designs to accommodate the overall shopping center design in which they are located. She further commented on the lack of sidewalks. Jim McGrath, Robert E. Lee Associates, replied they will change the roofs to be charcoal gray, and have minimized the corporate colors to a simple yellow stripe around the building. Mr. Bucklin replied there is an existing pedestrian walkway, and they will build another sidewalk in the landscaping when they remove some of that for ingress to Wal-Mart. Mr. Lohse advised that Condition No. 34 addresses the issue of pedestrian linkage, and that the inclusion of pedestrian access onto this site would allow foot traffic from Friedman Bros. to the proposed Jack-In-The-Box. Chairman Pruden asked if the applicants accepted the conditions on the project. She further inquired regarding the hours of operation for the proposed businesses. Mr. Bucklin replied they were accepting of the conditions, except for the recommendation regarding the sign. The hours of operation for both the restaurant and gas station will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 10:34 p.m. Commissioner Chiles commented that the staff and applicants have invested a great deal of time and effort in this project. He would be in favor of recommending approval of the site plan as submitted. Commissioner Correll stated that he commends the staff for their work, but has concerns with the ingress, egress, and density of the project. He would prefer that, due to the safety issues, half of the project be eliminated or else the entire project be moved to the other side of the freeway. Commissioner Puser stated she also had concerns relating to the traffic flow within the project and pedestrians walking to the direct services. It is not the appropriate project for the site. She prefers to continue the search for a sit-down restaurant. Commissioner Larson stated he agreed that this is a too intense use of the~. The significant number of off-site parking spaces tells him someone needs more space than they have and that the use is too intense. Two separate companies mean two separate projects; however, pedestrian safety issues have not been addressed. He further stated he does not like the access onto Airport Park Boulevard; the driveway is too close to the intersection. He prefers to see the primary access from the Wal-Mart property, with an "exit only" onto Airport Par}~ Boulevard. It addition, the internal circulation is confusing. The ehm~nabon of the car wash ~ the drive-thru would eliminate some problems. Things must be scaled back in order for the project to work appropriately. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 13 February 26, 1997 ITEM NO. 5b DATE: March 19, 1997 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF FLEXIBLE CRACK SEALANT SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of supplies costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. The City Street Department worked with the Purchasing Department to obtain quotes for the acquisition of approximately 25,920 pounds of flexible crack sealant. This sealant is used to seal cracks in pavement in order to prevent water infiltration into the base rock and subgrade. Four companies received requests for quotations. Three companies responded with quotes. Due to a tie bid between the two Iow bidders, staff elected to award the purchase order to Tri-American, Inc. since its product has a proven experience record with the City. The purchase amount of $7,658.68 is less than the street maintenance budget amount of $10,200. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report. Report is submitted pursuant to Municipal Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Acct. No. (if NOT budgeted): N/A Acct. No.: 100-3110-420-003 Appropriation Requested: N/A (if budgeted) Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineelr ,~---.,~ Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Rick Kennedy, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Attachments: 1. Bid Tabulation 2. FY 1996/1997 budget sheet RJS:AGCRACK. sUMCandace Horsley, City ~k.anager Chairman Pruden stated that it appears there would be too many cars trying to maneuver in the small parking lot. The populace in this area is not sophisticated; they will enter and exit as they see fit. From a planning perspective, this is just too small a lot for all of the things the applicants want to develop. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to,deny Site Development Permit No. 97-03, based on the reasons discussed above. \ LU~. AYES' Commissioners Larson, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden NOES: Commissioner Chiles. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. Stump advised this project will go before the City Council on March 19, 1997. 7D. Rezoning Application No. 96-52c, as filed by the City Planning Department, to rezone 45 parcels of land to zoning classifications consistent with the Land Use Designation assigned in the new General Plan. The project involves the rezoning of 25 parcels from "R-I" (Single Family Residential) to "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) generally located along Luce Avenue between Dora Avenue and 'State Street, and along the east side of South Street between Luce Avenue and Observatory Avenue; 19 parcels from "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) to "R-3" generally located along Observatory Avenue between Dora Street and South Street; and 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) located at 202 Washington Avenue. Senior Planner Stump briefly reviewed the proposed zoning changes, and advised that Planning staff recommends against the rezoning of the 25 parcels from "R-l" to "R-3," is supportive of rezoning the 19 parcels from "R-2" to "R-3," and recommends against the rezoning of the 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N." He stated he had received a number of correspondences that are consistent with staff's recommendations. The Commissioners waived their questions of staff and acted on each of the rezonings separately. Item No. 1' R-'I to R-3 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 10:53 p.m. · Kate Gould, 230 Luce Avenue, spoke in support of staff's recommendation, and stated this is a stable neighborhood, and she prefers it stay zoned single family residential. Tiffany Reynolds, 224 Luce, spoke in support of staff's recommendation not to change the zoning. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 10:56 p.m. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 February 26, 1997 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to, retain the "R-1" zoning on the 25 parcels, as recommended by staff. AYES: Commissiffn~rs Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Item No, 3:R-3 to C-N Chairman Pruden clarified that the property owner had been notified of the proposed rezoning. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 10:57 p.m. Ida Pittman, Willits, part owner of 202 Washington Avenue, stated she is not supportive of the rezoning. Her family has owned the property for the past 30 years, and during the past 14 years, she and her husband have made considerable improvements. They plan to continue to use it as a residential rental. Should they wish to sell the property to a person who would like to use it as a residence, that person may have difficulty obtaining conventional financing if it is rezoned. Since it is a small lot, it is not a large enough parcel for a commercial developer, and too costly for a private developer to do much with on a commercial basis. She feels the rezoning would devalue the property which they have attempted to improve in value. With the exception of the Brookside Retirement Home, the property surrounding this parcel is residential. The neighborhood is family- oriented, and it is the neighbors' desire to keep it that way. Pat Stefani, 225 Washington Avenue, read the letter she had presented to the Planning staff on February 2, 1997 from several realtors and property owners, stating they were opposed to the rezoning of this parcel. She requested the Commission not impact the property owners and neighborhood with another commercial lot. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 11:01 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by the following roll call vote, tovretain the "R-3" zoning on the parcel located at 202 Washington Street. AYES: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Item No, 2:R-2 to R-3 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 11:03 p.m. No one came forward. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 February 26, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: '1'1:04 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commission Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to rezone the 19 parcels from "R-2" to "R-3," as recommended by staff. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. ~ None. None. Mr. Stump advised that all of the rezoning items will go before the City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting of March 19, 1997. 8, 8A. 8B. 8C. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports See Planning Director's Memorandum of February 20, 1997. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Chairman Pruden rescinded her correction of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 1997. It was the consensus of the Commission to accept her action. 9A. Discussion of the Liu Property - 840 South Oak, Ukiah Discussion followed relative to the Liu property at 840 South Oak, wherein it was determined there would be resolution regarding all issues on this property in the near future. It was noted that the permit was approved for a duplex, but that the actual use has changed from a family-type duplex facility to a care facility. Staff clarified that unless care is being given to more than 6 persons, no permit is required. The bedrooms are occupied, but under individual leases, so technically it cannot be called a care home. Staff further noted the owner is not in violation of state programs, and they cannot find any section of the zoning code which would preclude the owner of the building from doing what she is doing; there is nothing in the code that prohibits a certain number of people from living on a parcel. Staff has notified the owner she must submit a clear parking plan within the next three weeks. There are no landscaping requirements. It was the consensus of the Commission that they will willingly work with Planning staff to clear up this type of issue, and expressed their shock that something like this could occur. Commissioner Chiles inquired regarding business cards for the Commissioners for the purpose of identifying themselves during site visits. He was informed by staff the item could possibly be included in budgeting for the new fiscal year. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 February 26, 1997 Chairman Pruden reported the Demolition Permit Review Committee approval of the demolition of properties on 577 Clara Avenue and 510 South Dora Street. Neither one of the properties was found to be historically significant. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:28 p.m. Charles Stump, Senior Planner Marge Giuntoli, Recording Secretary b:meg\win\pc022697.min MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 February 26, 1997 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO.: 7c(i), (_ii) & (iii) DATE: March 11, 1997 REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY ROBERT H. LEE & ASSOCIATES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1105 AIRPORT PARK BOULEVARD SUMMARY: Approval of the proposed ordinance amendment (#97-02) would delete language from the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance (No. 979) that prohibits the development of drive-thru restaurants on parcels designated for Highway Commercial land uses. The applicants have also requested the approval of a Site Development Permit (#97-03) to allow the development of a drive-thru restaurant and an auto service station that includes multiple gas pumps, a convenience store and an auto wash. These projects are thoroughly described and analyzed in the attached Staff Report to the Planning Commission (Attachment #4). On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission, in separate actions, recommended denial of the ordinance amendment application and denial of the Site Development Permit. (continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve the Resolution making CEQA Findings; 2) introduce by title only an ordinance amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance to allow drive-thru restaurants in the Highway Commercial land use designation; and 3) approve Site Development Permit No. 97-03, as modified by the applicants, and subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Department. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY ACTION: Accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and do not introduce the wording proposed by staff amending the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance and deny Site Development Permit No. 97-03. Citizen Advised: Publicly noticed pursuant to provisions of Ukiah Municipal Code Requested by: PMB Development Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Bob Sawyer, Planning Director Attachments: . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. CEQA Resolution Ordinance amending Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Revised Site Plan Planning Report to Planning Commission, dated February 26, 1997 Minutes of Planning Commission meeting on February 26, 1997 Letter from Mr. Chuck Shaw, dated March 6, 1997 Letter from Mr. Peter Bucklin, dated March 10, 1997 Letter from Mr. Dennis O'Keefe, dated March 12, 1997 Letter from Ms. Katherine Hunter opposing project, dated February 28, 1997 Petition in support of Jack In The Box restaurant (rec'd March 12, 1997) A p p ROV ~1~"'~;~'~) ~~ '~dac~ I--i(~rsl~y, CitManager Ordinance Amendment The proposed ordinance amendment would change the text defining allowed uses in the Highway Commercial (Section C) land use designation of the AlP to read as follows: 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. The Planning Commission did not make specific Findings to support their recommendation for the denial of the ordinance amendment, but individual Commissioners did cite specific reasons for their votes. These reasons included the desire to have a "sit-down restaurant" on the site, the prevalence of drive-thru restaurants that already exist in the Ukiah city limits, and the need to foster land uses that do not encourage automobile usage. The applicants for the project have proposed modifications to the site development that address some of the concerns expressed by the Commission, but have reiterated their need to have the drive-thru component of the restaurant remain an integral part of the project and the ordinance amendment. Each of the co-applicants for this project has submitted a letter (Attachments #7-9) to the Council which articulates project modifications and project design qualities. The Planning Department's support of the ordinance amendment is based, in part, on the staff conclusion that the drive-thru component of the proposed restaurant is generally consistent with other travel-oriented land uses permitted in the Highway Commercial land use designation of the AlP ordinance, and with the other travel-oriented use proposed for the project site. In addition, the proposed drive-thru restaurant design contains elements that are consistent with, or superior to, existing drive-thru restaurants located at or near other City "gateway" entrances. Staff has also determined that the drive-thru component is consistent with the goals and policies of the Ukiah Valley General Plan and with applicable design and development standards of the AlP PD ordinance. Staff further determined that a projected increase in traffic that would be attributable to the drive-thru component of this project would not be a significant increase in the levels of traffic in the business park, and would not, therefore require modification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) previously reviewed and certified by the City Council. Planning staff also notes that the approval of the proposed Site Development Permit with the drive-thru component is contingent upon the approval of this ordinance amendment. The Planning Department, therefore, respectively disagrees with the Planning Commission action and recommends that the City Council approve the proposed ordinance amendment, based on the Findings listed on Page 4 of this summary. Site Development Permit The Planning Commission's recommendation for the denial of the proposed Site Development Permit was largely predicated on the same reasons as their recommendation for the denial of the ordinance text changes. In addition, Commissioners also cited a compact and crowded design of the site; the limited site access from the south-bound lane of Airport Park Boulevard; incompatibility of building design and colors with other structures in area; and the use of off-site parking for the proposed development. Specific concerns and objections are stated in the Planning Commission Minutes for February 26, 1997 (Attachment #5). Planning staff originally analyzed the proposed development of the project site in the Planning Report (Attachment #4) submitted to the Planning Commission for its meeting on February 26, 1997. The Planning Department concluded in this report that the proposed site development would be consistent with the Ukiah Valley General Plan and the design guidelines and development standards of the AlP Planned Development area. Based on this analysis, the Planning Department did recommend that the project be approved, subject to 45 conditions. However, the applicants for this project have proposed that the original Site Development Permit application be amended in response to Planning Commission concerns and comments prior to its consideration by the City Council. These modifications are described in the revised site plans submitted after the Planning Commission hearing (Attachment #3), and in the letters submitted by Mr. Chuck Shaw of Jack In The Box restaurants, Mr. Dennis O'Keefe of Golden Gate Petroleum/Shell Oil Company, and Mr. Peter Bucklin of PMB Development Company. Specific changes include: A reduction of the proposed restaurant building, from a 2,637 square foot structure to a 2,377 square foot structure; indoor seating would be reduced from 90 seats to 54 seats. An outdoor dining area would be established on the south side of the building, with 16 seats around four tables. Four trees would be added to the landscape plan to provide shade for the outdoor seats. The removal of parking stalls between the restaurant structure and the gas pump canopy, which is designed to provide additional space for vehicle circulation. The reorientation of the gas pump canopy, which is designed to provide a wider access drive between the pumps and the convenience store building. A modification of the color for the exterior of the restaurant building, from white to an off- white color that would be consistent with existing structures in the business park. Improvement of pedestrian walkways along the southern portion of the site that would enhance pedestrian access between the restaurant structure and the lots to the south. Additional landscaping along the southern perimeter of the site, which is designed to provide screening of the auto wash. A reduction in the height of the proposed pole sign, from a maximum height of 30 feet to a height of 24 feet, which is designed to create consistency and uniformity with the structures on the site. Planning staff analyzed the proposed modifications, and concluded that the revised project addresses many of the Planning Commission's concerns in an effective manner. Specifically, the removal of parking stalls, the reorientation of the gas pump canopy and the installation of additional sidewalks and crosswalks should improve site access and circulation and provide a safer site for pedestrians and vehicle drivers. Aesthetic features of the project would also be enhanced by the smaller restaurant structure and the modified wall colors for the restaurant. The Planning Department's recommendation for approval of the original Site Development Permit did not include a recommendation for the approval of the thirty-foot high pole sign originally proposed as part of the sign program for the site. Staff's opposition to this sign was based on the fact that a sign of this height would be oriented toward freeway travelers on Highway 101, and does not, therefore, comply with Sign Code provisions (Section 3260) that prohibit the construction of signs adjacent to a landscaped freeway if it is oriented toward freeway users. The applicants have proposed, however, that the maximum height of the pole sign be reduced to twenty-four feet. It is the opinion of Planning staff that the modified sign height would substantially limit its visibility to freeway users to a level that is consistent with building signs that are located on existing commercial structures in the industrial park. The visibility of this sign would also be limited by the unique characteristics of the site, which include the buffered area containing the freeway on-ramp, the freeway overpass for Talmage Road, and landscaping in the freeway clover-leaf area. Additionally, the signing on the Jack-In-The-Box restaurant would be heavily screened by on-site landscaping designed to shield the proposed drive-thru lane of the restaurant. Based on these considerations, the Planning Department recommends that the proposed sign area be allowed, but that the base of the sign be constructed with materials and colors that are compatible to the restaurant structure, which is the nearest building. Staff suggests that the final design of the sign should be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director, as outlined in recommended Condition No. 46, which is included in the list of conditions below. Based on its analysis of the modified site development application, the Planning Department respectfully disagrees with the Planning Commission action and recommends the approval of Site Development Permit No. 97-03, as modified by project applicants, based on the Findings listed below, and subject to Conditions of Approval 1-46, which are listed below. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for approval of the proposed project, including the ordinance amendment and Site Development Permit, is based, in part, on the following findings: . The project is consistent with a "Highway Oriented Commercial" land use classification, in that a service station with a convenience store and a restaurant with a drive-thru window are very typical aspects of a land use expressly intended to serve the highway commuting public; . The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the design and development standards contained in the adopted Airport Industrial Park Planned Development (AlP PD) Ordinance; . The project is within the scope of the certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the industrial park (dated July, 1995), and, indeed, an independent traffic analysis prepared for the subject project confirms that its projected traffic would not result in impacts beyond those already addressed in the established mitigation program; and , The project is compatible with the adopted Ukiah Valley General Plan, in that the industrial park is shown as a "Master Plan Area", otherwise embodied in the AlP PD Ordinance, and the subject site is specifically called out as a "Highway Oriented Commercial" land use designation. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Site Development Permit #97-03, 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 and to any supporting documents submitted therewith. . Any construction, and the location thereof, shall conform to any maps, sketches, or plot plans accompanying the application or submitted by applicant in support thereof. , 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 such standards shall be met. . In addition to any particular condition which might be imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances. o Applicant shall be required to obtain any approval which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance. . Building permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the site development permit or same shall be null and void. 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 impact the project. . If any use permitted shall cease for six (6) consecutive months, then the right to any site development permit permitting such use shall terminate and such variance or use permit shall be revocable by the granting body. . If any condition, special or standard, is violated or if any required approval is not obtained, then the site development permit granted shall be null and void; otherwise to continue in full force and effect indefinitely until otherwise terminated and shall run with the land. , Except as otherwise specifically noted, any site development permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving such site development permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. 10. The applicant shall provide a grant of easement for roadways, drainage and public utilities in accordance with improvement plans previously approved or required by the Director of Public Works. 11. All curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street paving which are broken or damaged or driveways which will not be used are to be removed and replaced as required by the City Engineer. 12. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" of asphalt concrete with a 6" aggregate base, or an approved option. 13. On-site drainage shall be to the approval of the City Engineer. 14. All work within the City right-of-way shall be performed by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License. Contractor must submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability, $1,000,000; Property Damage, $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. 15. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department is required to perform all work within the street right-of-way. 16. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion, and drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. 17. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Department of Public Utility. 18. Street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees shall be as per the City Engineer's recommendations. 19. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and ventilation apparatus be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building on which it is located. 20. Any outdoor refuse/recycle containers be aesthetically screened from view. Garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosure. Air Quality 21. All exposed or disturbed soil shall be regularly watered to avoid the transportation of dust. 22. Every attempt shall be made to keep all construction areas swept and clear of mud and debris. 23. Bicycle parking facilities shall be installed near the entrance to the buildings prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy. 24. All tenants of the project buildings shall participate in a Transportation Management Association when it is formed. Noise 25. Construction equipment shall be properly muffled and maintained. 26. Hours of construction be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Fire Protection 27. All development shall be constructed according to the requirements of the City Fire Department, including, but not limited to the design and installation of a fire sprinkler system. 28. No-parking zones shall be established and maintained in accordance with the Ukiah Fire Code. Sewaqe/Wastewater Disposal 29. The detailed construction plans submitted for a building permit shall include water conservation devices on toilets, urinals, and faucets. 30. The applicants shall pay the required sewer/water connection fees at the time of application for service. 31. Sewage collectors for the project shall be sized and constructed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Schools 32. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit(s), the applicant or other developers of the project site shall pay the required Ukiah Unified School District fees applicable to their commercial development projects. Landscapinq 33. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a final landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City Planning Director for review and approval. Pedestrian Linkage 34. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicants or other developers shall submit a detailed plan for creating a pedestrian link between the proposed project, and the WalMart retail store to the south. The plan shall include, but not be limited to the installation of crosswalks and sidewalk extensions that would permit patrons of the proposed structures on the site to access these structures without walking through unmarked access driveways. The plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the Planning Director. Recycling 36. Prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy the applicants or other developers of the site shall prepare and submit separate recycling plans/statements to the City Planning Department for review and approval. The Plans/statements shall include, but not be limited to provisions for recycling cardboard and other recyclable products used by the applicants. Visual Quality 37. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, joint or separate lighting plans shall be submitted to the City Planning Department for review and approval. 38. Exterior lighting associated with the project shall include shielded, non-glare types of lights. Sign lighting shall be kept to an absolute minimum. GeoloqvlSoils 39. Prior to the commencement of site preparation and construction activities, the applicants shall submit a detailed geotechnical report of the site. The analysis shall be conducted by a registered engineering geologist or geological engineer. Field and laboratory data should be analyzed to provide the following geotechnical information: a. A description of the soil and geologic conditions observed, including faulting and landsliding. b. Site grading recommendations. c. Recommended foundation types and design criteria. d. Retaining wall design criteria, as necessary. e. Recommendations for slab-on-grade construction, as applicable. f. Geotechnical engineering drainage recommendations. The applicants shall construct the project per the recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation. 40. All proposed Structures/facilities shall comply with current seismic design standards contained in the Uniform Building Code. Hvdrolo_~v 41. Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the applicants shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and secure a General Construction Activity Permit, if necessary. Access and Parking 42. The forty-foot wide driveway located along the Airport Park Boulevard frontage for the subject property shall be restricted to an "exit-only" driveway if the City Engineer determines that five or more accidents have occurred in a period of twelve consecutive months as the result of vehicles that are southbound on Airport Park Boulevard making a U-turn at the median islands or turning onto the site from the north-bound lane. 43. Verification of an access easement to allow ingress and egress across the WalMart property to the south of the subject property shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the approval of building permits. 44. A Parking Agreement to allow off-site parking spaces on the WalMart property to the south of the subject property shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the approval of building permits. Design Amenities 44. One or more park benches shall be installed in the area located to the south of the proposed restaurant structure or in an area approved by the Planning Director. 45. All conditions be completed prior to release of final inspection and issuance of use and occupancy permit. 46. The freestanding sign proposed for the southeast corner of the site shall be single-sided and shall be constructed on a base that is constructed with a similar design and materials to those used in the construction of the proposed restaurant building. The final design and location of the sign shall be included in a sign program for the development of the site and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21081 AND CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ("CEQA") GUIDELINES SECTION 15091 RELYING ON THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR BUILDOUT OF THE AIRPORT INDUSTRIAL PARK (ALP) IN CONJUNCTION WITH AMENDMENTS TO THE AlP PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (97-02), AND APPROVAL OF THE SHELL GAS STATION AND JACK-IN- THE-BOX JOINT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS: 1. The City of Ukiah, as Lead Agency, has prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), consisting of a Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, dated March, 1995 ("DEIR"), and a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, dated July, 1995 ("FEIR"), for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park (ALP); and 2. PMB Development Company has applied for an amendment to the AlP Planned Development Ordinance to allow a drive-thru restaurant project on a parcel designated as Highway Commercial, and a site development permit to allow the construction and operation of a Jack-in-the-Box restaurant and Shell gas station/mini-mart/car wash located on the Highway Commercial designated property within the Airport Industrial Park; and . AlP; and The EIR identified significant environmental impacts resulting from buildout of the 4. The City Council certified the EIR and has approved previous AlP Planned Development ordinance amendments and development projects; and 5. The City Council may subsequently choose to approve the proposed amendments to the AlP Planned Development ordinance, and the associated development project proposed by PMB Development Company; and 6. The certified EIR for the buildout of the AlP is considered a "programmatic" EIR prepared for a series of actions characterized as one large project referred to as buildout of the AlP; and 7. Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provide that the City shall not approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental impacts, unless it makes specified findings; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah finds as follows: 1. The programmatic EIR was prepared and made available for public review and comment in full compliance with the procedures set forth in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. 2. The programmatic EI R was considered by both the Planning Commission and City Council at noticed public hearings on August 9, 1995 and August 16, 1995, respectively, which were conducted in full compliance with all legal requirements. 3. The City Council has considered all documents submitted for consideration prior to or during the hearings it conducted and all testimony presented during the hearings as well as the EIR, the Staff Report, dated July 28, 1995, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and the Staff Report, dated August 11, 1995. The Staff Reports are incorporated herein by reference. It has also independently reviewed and considered this resolution. 4. The programmatic EIR evaluated the impacts resulting from the eventual buildout and completion of the Airport Industrial Park. Those impacts, both individual and cumulative, along with recommended mitigation measures were summarized in Resolution 96-23, adopted for previously approved amendments to the AlP Planned Development ordinance and certification of the EIR on October 18, 19.95, and incorporated herein by reference. 5. Measures designed to avoid or substantially lessen significant effects of future development projects within the Airport Industrial Park will be imposed on projects as buildout occurs and the significance thresholds identified in the EIR are reached. In this way, full mitigation will be achieved as development occurs and is phased over time within the AlP. 6. The current amendment to the AlP Planned Development ordinance, which proposes to delete the prohibition of drive-thru restaurants on the Highway Designated Commercial parcel(s) does not change the assumptions, analysis, or conclusions contained in the certified EIR, because an independent traffic analysis prepared for the subject project confirms that its projected traffic would not result in impacts beyond those already addressed in the established mitigation program, and because the amount of building coverage and development intensity is consistent with that assumed for the parcel. 7. The currently proposed amendments to the AlP have been examined in light of the Program EIR, and it has been determined that the project is within the scope of the Program EIR, and no additional environmental document must be prepared for the following reasons: a, The currently proposed amendments would not produce environmental effects not examined in the certified Program EIR. b. The currently proposed amendments would not require new mitigation measures not included in the certified Program EIR. 8. To support the conclusion articulated in Item No. 7 above, the following environmental analysis is provided in Items No. 9 through 19. 9. Geology. The EIR geotechnical consultants determined that there were no significant geotechnical constraints on the site. Site soils may be subject to expansion and/or some settlement. It will be necessary to upgrade soils or construct proper foundations to ensure the future buildings are not damaged by settlement. All necessary fill materials and activities must be properly engineered to ensure the long-term integrity of future improvements. Site grading and trenching will result in bared soils. The surface soils and poorly consolidated terrace soils will be prone to erosion. This is a potentially significant impact since eroded soils can adversely affect water quality and the aquatic habitat. Geology Mitigations: The EIR recommends that all future development projects within the Airport Industrial park, such as the PMB Development Company proposal, be required to have a complete geotechnical investigation, and the applicants secure a General Construction Activity Permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, if necessary. Geology Finding: The mitigation measures are reasonable and feasible, and the City finds that their implementation will avoid or reduce to acceptable levels the geological impacts resulting from the project. These measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the grading and building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. 10. Hydrology and Drainage. Development of the PMB Development Company building and other site improvements will increase runoff from the site. However, the existing culverts draining the site can handle the increased flows. No significant impacts identified. Surface water runoff from the proposed project, like all commercial and industrial development, will generate minor concentrations of a number of pollutants, including oil, grease, nutrients from fertilizers, and heavy metals from roadway pavements. Hydrology/Drainage Mitigations: The project will not result in significant drainage related impacts. However, mitigations measures are recommended to resolve the minor drainage issues discussed above. These measures include, requiring developers to prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans and obtain General Construction Activity Permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, if necessary; and to share in the funding and construction of ditch stabilization measures on the ditch east of the 36-inch culvert and on the ditch east of the twin 4-foot by 6-foot box culverts east of the freeway. Hydrology/Drainage Findings: The mitigation measures are reasonable and feasible, except for sharing in the funding and construction of ditch stabilization measures on the ditch east of the 36-inch culvert and on the ditch east of the twin 4-foot by 6-foot box culverts east of the freeway. The City finds that implementation of the remaining mitigation measures as conditions of project approval will avoid or reduce to acceptable levels the Hydrology/drainage impacts resulting from the construction of the project. These measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the grading and building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. The City finds that the recommended mitigation measures concerning ditch stabilization measures on privately-owned property agricultural property east of the freeway and outside the City Limits are not the responsibility of the applicants and are not feasible, since the applicant has no reasonable ability to enter upon private land to put improvements in place. 11. Biotic Environment: The PMB Development Company parcel has been extensively disturbed and filled in the past. No rare or endangered plant or animal species have been observed on the site, and past grading of the site has degraded its value as wildlife habitat. No significant impacts identified. Biotic Mitigations: No mitigation measures recommended. Biotic Environment Findings: Based on the analysis and information contained in the EIR, the City Council finds that the PMB Development Company project will not have significant adverse impacts on the Biotic Environment of the project site. 12. Air Quality: The impact of a proposed action is judged to be significant based upon a criteria for significance. The legal criteria used for determining whether or not the indirect emissions generated by automobiles attracted to the Jack-in-the-Box restaurant and Shell gas station/mini-mart/car wash projects are the State and Federal Ambient air quality standards. These facilities will attract automobiles that will generate small amounts of air pollutants. There is no evidence that generation of these pollutants will result in regional air quality exceeding State or Federal air quality standards. Because the project will not result in State or Federal air quality standards being exceeded and because the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District does not have any formally adopted thresholds of significance for projects that generate indirect emissions, there is no basis to conclude that the project will result in significant adverse impacts to local air quality. Air Quality Mitigations: Although no significant air quality impacts would result from the project, a number of mitigation measures are recommended to avoid temporary dust and particulate impacts during grading, and to decrease vehicle emissions associated with the project. These measures include the following: a. All exposed or disturbed soil shall be regularly watered to avoid the transportation of dust. b. Every attempt shall be made to keep all construction areas swept and clear of mud and debris. C. Bicycle parking facilities shall be installed at the project site prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy. do The applicants shall participate in a Transportation Management Association when it is formed. Air Quality Findings: For the reason stated above, as well as the technical information contained in the EIR, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on any State or Federal air quality standard, and is, therefore, presumed under CEQA Guideline 15064(i) to have no significant adverse impact on air quality. However, the City Council finds that the project will contribute to the cumulative formative of ozone and short-term particulate matter in the Ukiah Valley. While the City Council finds further that this cumulative contribution or both ozone and particulate matter is speculative and cannot feasibly be quantified with any degree of accuracy, measures should be taken to limit and reduce the amount of these air pollutants resulting from the projects. Therefore, the City Council finds that the recommended mitigation measures designed to avoid or lessen dust and particulate matter, as well as vehicle emissions are reasonable and feasible. These measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the grading and building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. 13. Visual Quality: Development of the PMB Development Company project will replace views of an open field with 3 small structures. The highway commercial type buildings will be one-story and will have similar architectural features as the near-by Wal-Mart store to the south, and will be situated on a parcel(s) designated for highway commercial type development. While it is not anticipated that the proposed developments would have a significant adverse impact on the visual quality, a number of mitigation measures are suggested to further soften the appearance of the structures. following: Visual Quality Mitigations: Recommended mitigation measures include the a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a final landscaping plan for the project shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. b. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, joint or separate lighting plans shall be submitted to the City Planning Department for review and approval. C. Exterior lighting associated with the project shall include shielded, non-glare types of lights. Sign lighting shall be kept to an absolute minimum. Visual Quality Findings: Impacts to viewsheds and visual quality are highly subjective and difficult to quantify. While no health risks are involved, significant adverse impacts to visual quality can erode the local quality of life. The City Council finds that the PMB Development Company project could have impacts on the visual quality of the project site. The City Council finds further that the suggested mitigation measures contained in the EIR are reasonable and feasible, and will adequately soften potential visual impacts to an acceptable level. The adopted mitigation measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. 14. Noise: Project traffic will increase noise levels in the surrounding area less than one decibel. This amount is considered imperceptible and is not a significant impact. Noise Mitigations: Even though the project would not produce significantly adverse amounts of noise, the following mitigation measures are recommended to limit or reduce short-term noise impacts: a. Construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 am to 5:00 pm on weekdays and 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays. b. Construction equipment shall be properly muffled and maintained. Noise Findings: The City finds that all the mitigation measures are reasonable and feasible, and that their implementation will avoid or reduce noise impacts to an acceptable levels. The adopted mitigation measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. 15. Public Services: Development of the PMB Development Company project will not have significant adverse impacts on public services. Water is available to serve the project, and there is sewer capacity to handle the amount of wastewater the project would generate. While the EIR indicates that project could potentially have an impact on City police and fire services, it concludes that the City must determine if this potential impact would be significant. With the payment of adopted developer mitigation fees to the Ukiah Unified School District, it will not impact local school facilities. Public Service Mitigations: Even though the project will not have significant adverse impacts on public services, the following mitigation measures are intended to avoid or eliminate impacts of the proposal: ao All development shall be constructed according to the requirements of the City Fire Department, including, but not limited to the design and installation of a fire sprinkler system. b. The detailed construction plans submitted for a building permit shall include water conservation devices on toilets, urinals, and faucets. Co The PMB Development Company project shall pay the required sewer/water connection fees at the time of application for service. d. Sewage collectors for the project shall be sized and constructed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. e. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, PMB Development Company or the actual applicant for the building permit shall pay the required Ukiah School District fees applicable to industrial development. Public Service Findings: The City finds that all the mitigation measures are reasonable and feasible, and will adequately avoid or reduce impacts on public services to acceptable levels. The adopted mitigation measures will become conditions of project approval and will be monitored during the building permit process as well as during the construction phases of the project. The City Council finds further that a development impact fee program for police and fire services is not necessary because the anticipated sales and property tax generated from new development within the AlP will substantially assist in the long-term funding of new equipment and personnel. The City Council finds further that the remaining mitigation measures imposed as conditions of project approvals, will avoid or reduce to acceptable levels impacts on City Police and Fire Services. 16. Land Use: The development of the PMB Development Company project is consistent with the City General Plan which designates the site for Highway Commercial uses. Hence, the project is consistent with the assumptions and scope of the Ell=, in terms of land use. Additionally, the EIR concludes that there will not be a conflict with the Municipal Airport to the west of the site, and that the mitigation measures contained in other impact categories will successfully off-set potential conflicts and impacts to land use. Land Use Mitigations: No mitigations required. Land Use Findings: Based on the analysis and information contained in the EIR, the City Council finds that the project will not have significant adverse impacts on land use. 17. Traffic and Circulation: The EIR assumed a 5,000 square foot restaurant on the parcel, and the project involves dividing the parcel in two, and constructing a 2,600 square foot Jack-in-the-Box restaurant, and a 2,450 square foot Shell gas station with a mini-mart and car wash. Accordingly, staff determined that an analysis should be conducted comparing the traffic generated by the proposed project to that which was assumed in the certified EIR. The analysis revealed that the proposed project would generate approximately 150 more p.m. peak hour vehicle trips than the 5,000 square foot restaurant. This is due to the high trip generate rate for the drive-thru Jack-in-the-box restaurant and auto dominated gas station/mini- mart/car wash uses. The next step in the analysis involved plugging the higher number of trips into the buildout equation. W-Trans, a professional traffic engineering firm performed this task (see report dated February 7, 1997), and found that there would not be additional mitigation measures necessary to accommodate the proposed project, beyond those that are required for buildout pursuant to the previous land use assumptions. Traffic and Circulation Mitigations: The project proponents will be required to participate in a Off-Site Capital Improvement Program to contribute their fair share to the necessary traffic related improvements resulting from buildout of the RBP. Traffic and Circulation Findings: The City finds that the mitigation measure is reasonable and feasible, and will adequately avoid or reduce cumulative traffic impacts associated with the PMB Development Company project. 18. Project Alternatives: The EIR discusses alternatives to the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park with the assumed mix and intensity of land uses, but does not specifically discuss alternatives to the PMB Development Company project because it was not proposed at the time of EIR preparation. However, should the existing PMB Development Company proposal be unsatisfactory to the decision-makers, due to policy or community compatibility issues rather than environmental impacts, the City Council could craft specific findings and disapprove the project. Another alternative to consider is a decreased building intensity or size. However, this alternative is infeasible because the PMB Development Company project has already been reduced in size and scope in response to concerns expressed by the City Planning Commission, and further reductions in size and intensity could render the project infeasible. 19. Conclusions: The City Council is able to conclude that the project is within the scope of the EIR, because it is in substantial conformance with the type and intensity of development assumed for the parcel. All applicable measures designed to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts contained in the certified EIR have been imposed on the PMB Development Company Site Development Permit application No. 97-03. In terms of traffic, it has been determined that while the proposed development project would generate more p.m. peak hour traffic than assumed for the parcel in the certified EIR, it would not be enough to require new and additional mitigation measures. Therefore, it has been determined that the project is in substantial conformance with the scope, findings, and conclusions contained in the traffic section of the certified "Program" EIR. PASSED AND ADOPTED this AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: day of March, 1997, by the following roll call vote: Sheridan Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk 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 Ordinance is to provide for a coordinated development of compatible industrial, office, and commercial land uses. It details both allowed and permitted uses within each land use category, regulates nuisances, and provides development standards and design guidelines. It changes the land use designation terminology using clearer more concise terms to more accurately characterize existing development, and provide well-defined land use categories for future development in the Airport Industrial Park. The changes to land use designations are as follows: 1) Office Commercial to Professional Offices; 2) Industrial/Commercial to Retail Commercial; 3) Highway Oriented Commercial/General Commercial to Highway Oriented Commercial. No change to the Industrial designation term has been made. A new designation termed Industrial/Automotive Commercial has been added. Section Two This ordinance also formally amends the Land Use Map that illustrates which land uses designations are assigned to the various properties throughout the Airport Industrial Park. The land use designations apply to the Airport Industrial Park in the following manner: ., a 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 acres). 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 14.83 acres north of Commerce Drive, and approximately 22 acres south of Commerce Drive, bounded by Airport Park Boulevard on the west, and Highway 101 on the east approximately (approximately 36.83 acres). 4. Industrial: Applies to the remainder of the Airport Industrial Park (approximately 61.4 acres). 5. Industrial/Automotive Commercial: Applies to the approximate 16 acres of the southern portion of the Redwood Business Park, south of the existing Friedman Brothers Home Improvement Center property, east of Airport Park Boulevard, and fronting Highway 101. Section Three 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 amended the ordinance 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. Section Four 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. Section Five The Development Map (Generalized Land Use Map) for this Planned Development, as required by the Ukiah Municipal Code, and attached as Exhibit "A", is approved. The Traffic Circulation Plan for this Planned Development is discussed in Section "D" on page 15, and the Circulation Map is attached as Exhibit "B". Section Six Development standards not addressed in the Planned Development regulations shall be those specified in the City of Ukiah Zoning Code. Section Seven Amendment to this ordinance requires City Council action. All Use and Site Development Permits for proposed developments within the Airport Industrial Park require City Planning Commission review and action. Decisions on Site Development and Use Permits made by the City Planning Commission are appealable to the City Council by any interested party. Section Ei.qht 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 Nine The regulations for this Planned Development, as prescribed in Ukiah City Code Sections 9167(b) and 9166, and as amended, 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 breakdown of freight; or other similar use involving shipping, warehousing, and distribution activities. c. Wholesaling and Related Uses - 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 - 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 1 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 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 station, and government offices. g. Repair Services - includes repair services such as radio and al h. television, furniture, automotive repair, body and fender shops. Communication Installations -includes radio and television stations, telegraph and telephone offices, cable T.V., and micro- wave stations. Mini-storage facility. PROFESSIONAL OFFICE DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses The following uses are allowed in the Professional Office designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: 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. c. Child day-care facility. d. Retail commercial (in the built-out northwest portion of this area outside the boundaries of the Redwood Business Park). 2. Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted in the Professional Office Designation with the securing of a Use Permit: a. Delicatessen, sandwich shop, or small sit-down restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants). C. Di b. Small grocery or convenience store. HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses The following uses are allowed in the Highway Commercial designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: 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. c. Automobile Dealerships and related uses. 2. Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted in the Retail Commercial designation with the securing of a Use Permit: a. Delicatessen, sandwich shop, or small sit-down restaurant (no drive-thru restaurants). b. Small grocery or convenience store. c. Banking facility. INDUSTRIAL/AUTOMOTIVE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION 1. Allowed Uses F. m The following uses are allowed in the Industrial/Automotive Commercial Land Use Designation with the securing of a Site Development Permit: a. All the allowed industrial uses listed in Item A (1) above. b. Automobile dealerships, except for those that exclusively sell used vehicles. 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. 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 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 City 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 requirement 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 Ukiah Municipal Code 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 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 17 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 curves, or having other extraordinary characteristics. 2. Maximum Lot Coverage No more than 45 percent of the lot shall be covered by a building or structure. Parking lots and landscaping areas shall not be included in the calculation of lot coverage. 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 40 foot setback from the property line adjacent to the freeway. Side yard setbacks shall be determined in the Site Development 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 m = Sm shall comply with the Federal Aviation Administration side slope criteria. 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. 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. Development Integration Every effort shall be made to "master plan" development within the Airport 10. 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. 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. 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 . 3. 4. 5. Right-of-way 66 feet 44 feet Pavement 64 feet 40 feet a. travel lanes (2) 14 feet 20 feet b. left turn lane 12 feet 12 feet Curbs (both sides) 1 foot 1 foot Cul-de-sac (turn-arounds) 100 feet diameter Curb Returns Radius 35 feet 35 feet 32 feet 30 feet 15 feet 12. Access Driveways and Deceleration Lanes a. b, c. do 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. Every effort shall be made to design common driveways for individual developments. No Talmage Road access shall be permitted for Parcel A1A. 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 Parkinq and Loading Requirements ao b, c, 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 provided use. Adequate apron and dock space also shall be provided for truck maneuvering on individual lots. The number of entrance/exit driveways shall be limited to one per every 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 2.-I do 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. 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 Municipal Code, and findings that otherwise demonstrate no on-street parking congestion will result. Hi 14. Siqna~e 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. a. 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. Landscaping and Open Sr~ace 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. Landscaping shall be used to screen parking lots, loading docks, and storage areas. g. Landscaping in parking lots shall include a variety of tree species that will provide sufficient shading in the summer. The majority of parking lot trees shall be deciduous and fast growing. h. The exact number of parking lot trees shall depend upon the size of the parking facility, the type of land use, and the species of tree used. The Planning Director shall determine the appropriate number of trees for parking lots on a project-by-project basis. i. At a minimum, fifteen percent (15%) of the entire parcel shall be landscaped with planting materials. The Planning Commission may reduce this requirement if special circumstances applicable to the size or configuration of the property exists, or if unique circumstances associated with the use would preclude a fifteen percent (15%)landscaping coverage. Landscaping plans shall focus on drought tolerant plant species with varied flowering patterns. k. Large turf/lawn areas shall be discouraged in the overall landscaping plan. I. All landscaping shall be properly maintained. Orientation and Location of Buildings a. The location of buildings shall be coordinated with other buildings and 1 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. Buildin ,q Exteriors a. Colors and building materials shall be carefully selected, and must be compatible with surrounding developments, and shall be finalized during 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. Liqhting a. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review and approval with all Site Ji 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, or adjacent properties. 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 an emergency access provided through the airport to a 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 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. The southern access road concept, as envisioned in the original Specific Plan for the Airport Industrial Park is retained, but exact design and routing is neither implied nor specifically assumed. 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 2.5 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 Nine 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 Use and Site Development Permits for proposed developments within the Airport Industrial Park require City Planning Commission review and action. c. Decisions on Site Development and Use Permits made by the City Planning Commission are appealable to the City Council by any interested party. d. so 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. The Zoning Administrator's decision on minor modifications to an approved Site Development Permit or Use Permit is appealable directly to the City Council. The Planning Commission's decision on major modifications to an approved Site Development Permit or Use Permit is appealable to the City Council. 2, Building Modifications a. Exterior modifications to existing buildings shall be designed to complement and harmonize with the design of the existing structure and surrounding developments. b. A Site Development Permit shall be approved by the Planning Commission for all exterior modifications to existing structures, site design, and landscaping within the Airport Industrial Park. The application procedure shall be that prescribed in the Ukiah City Code. Section Ten 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: 2-7 Sheridan Malone, Mayor ATTEST: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk / 1 / / / / 1 ~/'..._ ! 1 I f 1 ! I t I ! / / i~!l,il, ~11 t~l ~ ~i it , i 1 :i!~ ~!ml..I ol !~1111o111't! I'1,"~II, REVISED SITE PLAN FOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 97-03 I I ! I I I I t I I I t CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT DATE: February 26, 1997 TO: City of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Planned Development Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02 and Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 APPLICANT: Robert H. Lee & Associates for PMB Development Co. PROJECT SUMMARY: Approval of the proposed ordinance amendment would allow deletion of the language contained in the AlP Planned Development Ordinance (No. 979) that excludes drive-thru restaurants from the list of allowed uses on parcels in the AlP that have been designated for Highway Commercial land uses. The proposed Site Development Permit would allow the commercial development of the site, including a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru window and an auto service station with six pump islands, a convenience store, and a car wash. The applicants have also requested approval of a 200 square foot pole sign with a proposed maximum height of thirty feet. It should be noted that approval of the Site Development Permit with the drive-thru component is contingent upon approval of the subject ordinance amendment. It should also be noted that the ordinance amendment requires City Council review and approval. Hence, staff recommends that the Planning Commission act on both applications, regardless of its disposition on the ordinance amendment, so that the City Council has the benefit of the Commission's dialogue, discussion, and advice on the entire project. In addition to the projects listed above, the City Engineer approved a Tentative Minor Subdivision Map (#97-04) on February 6 of this year to allow the tentative division of the site into two parcels with an area of approximately 30,000 square feet each once a Parcel Map is approved. The proposed dimensions of these parcels are shown on the site plan for this project. The discretionary action associated with the Site Development Permit listed above is quasi-judicial in nature; therefore, each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove or modify the proposed projects. LOCATION: The proposed site for both projects is located at 1105 Airport Park Boulevard, on the northeast corner of the intersection of Airport Park Boulevard and Talmage Road (Assessor Parcel #180-070-36). PROJECT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02 on the grounds that the drive-thru component of the restaurant is consistent with typical "Highway Oriented Commercial" land use classifications; that the drive-thru lane would be effectively screened by the proposed structures and landscaping; that the drive-thru component would not create traffic impacts beyond the scope of the previously certified EIR; and that the drive-thru component would only apply to the AlP PD's "Highway Oriented Commercial" designation, effectively precluding other such uses throughout the industrial park. The Planning Department further recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of Site Development Permit No. 97-03, with staff-proposed modifications, on the grounds that the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Ukiah Valley General Plan and with the site development and design standards for Highway Commercial development in the Airport Industrial Park. The recommended modification consists of the exclusion of the proposed freestanding pole sign on the southeast corner of the site. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The City of Ukiah, as Lead Agency, certified a "Program Environmental Impact Report" for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park according to specific development assumptions and projections. The proposed site development would increase the number of vehicles projected to use the site, but it has been determined by the City that this increase would not be substantial enough to affect the analysis and conclusions regarding traffic and circulation within the AlP. It has been further concluded that the proposed development would not change projections or buildout assumptions discussed in the certified EIR, and would not introduce new environmental impacts that were not anticipated or evaluated in the document. The EIR for the project does include a number of mitigation measures that would apply to the development of the proposed project. These measures are included as recommended Conditions of Approval for this project. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Master Plan Area ZONING DISTRICT: P-D (Airport Industrial Park Planned Development) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site is a 1.39 acre parcel located directly north of the WalMart parking lot. This parcel, which is relatively flat, is undeveloped except for road and sidewalk improvements located along the western portion of the lot. Existing vegetation includes grass and Redwood trees. The proposed development would include a 2,637 square foot fast food restaurant (Jack in the Box) that would be located on the parcel proposed for the east side of the site. This building would be partially circled by a twelve-foot wide drive-thru lane with stacking space for eight vehicles between its entrance on the southwest corner of the building and the service window that would be located on the east side of the structure. The restaurant building would be bounded on the north and south by landscape planters and walkways, and by sidewalks and ten parking stalls on the west. The elevations submitted with the Site Development Permit application indicate that the bulk of the restaurant building would be seventeen feet high with a mansard-style, standing seam metal roof designed to screen equipment that would be located on the top of the building. Parapet structures would be constructed over the serving window and building entrances, which are located on the south and north sides of the structure. These parapets would be constructed of the same textured plaster facia or soffit materials and prefinished metal trim that would be used on building walls, and would include the main building signs, a decorative louver and a decorative reveal. Parapet roofs would utilize the same metal roofing materials as the mansard roof. There would be windows located on the east, west and south sides of the building, with a service entrance on the north elevation. Building walls would be painted white, with prefinished metal flashing near the roofline and a red decorative reveal located along the base of the building. Roof materials would be charcoal in color, with black flashing and trim; the signs located on the parapets would be made of red plastic letters. The 2,452 square foot convenience store structure would be located on the proposed parcel on the west side of the site. This building would be twenty feet high, with a standing seam metal roof, facia and plaster corners and smooth metal panel walls. The customer entrance and large glass windows would be located on the northern elevation, with a metal service door located on the east side. This building would be partially circled by a drive-thru lane that would provide access to an eighteen foot high car wash that would be constructed with the same building and roofing materials onto the south side of the convenience store. The entrances for the car wash would be on the east and west sides of the structure. The colors that would be used on the convenience store consist of blue for the roof, light and dark gray walls accented by yellow strips near the top of the walls and the base of the building. Building signs would be internally lit, but no colors are shown on site plans. The gas pump islands would be covered with a seventeen-foot high canopy structure that would cover approximately 3,500 square feet. Structural materials are not shown on building elevations, but it is likely that the materials would be similar to those used on the convenience store. Access to the site would be from a primary access driveway located on the western portion of the site and a secondary access driveway that would connect the site to the existing WalMart parking lot area. The proposed structures would be connected by paved areas that would provide internal circulation and parking areas. Thirty-five parking spaces would be located in four parking areas on the site, with an additional nine parking spaces located on the property to the south. Three of the proposed parking spaces would be wide enough for handicapped parking; the remainder of the parking stalls would be full-size. In addition, the drive-thru lane for the restaurant would be long enough to provide stacking for eight vehicles, and the stacking lane for the proposed car wash could accommodate at least four vehicles. The landscape plan submitted with the project shows that landscape planter areas would be constructed along all four sides of the project site. These planters would generally be eight to twenty-five feet wide, and would be planted with a variety of groundcovers, shrubs and trees. STAFF ANALYSIS: Planning Department staff reviewed the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance and determined that the proposed auto service station is permitted in the Highway Commercial land use designation. Staff further determined, however, that the drive thru lane for the proposed restaurant structure is prohibited according to Section C(1)(a) of the ordinance, which states: a. Businesses such as motels, sit-down restaurants (no drive thru restaurants), service stations, and other similar uses that provide services and merchandise primarily to highway travelers. The applicants have indicated that the drive thru lane shown on project plans is an integral part of the proposed restaurant use, and that the development of a "sit-down" restaurant on this site is not economically feasible at this time. The applicants have, therefore, requested that the text of the ordinance be changed to read as follows: b, 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. It is the opinion of Planning Department staff that the proposed drive-thru lane would be consistent with the fast-food restaurant (Jack-in-the-Box) proposed as part of this application, and that its presence would be largely mitigated by its location on the east and north portions of the site and the screening that would be provided by the proposed landscaping. Based on these factors, the Planning Department does recommend that the proposed ordinance amendment be approved. However, staff is compelled to emphasize that this amendment would only apply to the subject site, which is the only vacant lot in the industrial park designated as "Highway Oriented Commercial", and that drive-thru restaurants would remain a prohibited land use throughout the balance of the park. Development Standards Planning Department staff also reviewed project plans to determine if the development of the site proposed in the Site Development Permit application would be consistent with the development standards required in Section G of the AlP Ordinance. Staff determined that the project is consistent with requirements for minimum lot sizes; maximum lot coverage; minimum building setbacks; maximum building height; screening; sidewalks; bicycle lanes; require public streets; street width standards; and loading. The project is not entirely consistent with development standards discussed below, although modifications have been developed which would make the project compatible with current AlP standards and criteria for development. Public Utility Easements: All lots developed in the Airport Industrial Park are required to provide a five-foot wide easement in the required front setback areas for the provision of utilities, but no easements have been shown on project site plans. The applicants have discussed the provision of utility services on the site with both City staff and private utility providers, and agreed to provide required public utility easements along the Talmage Road and Airport Park Boulevard frontages. The locations and widths of these easements would be determined prior to the issuance of building permits, as required in Condition No. 10. Development Integration: The ordinance requires that applicants for projects in the AlP make every effort to "master plan" their project with other development, and encourages the coordination of compatible architectural themes, site planning, vehicle and pedestrian circulation and compatible land uses. It is the opinion of staff that this project has been effectively integrated with other development in the AlP, with the exception of pedestrian circulation. Project plans show that the subject property would be connected with the property to the south, which is developed with a WalMart retail store, by a five-foot wide sidewalk that would extend along the entire southern property line. This sidewalk would provide pedestrian access along the perimeters of the site, but it would not allow pedestrians or handicapped persons in wheelchairs access to the proposed restaurant or convenience store without crossing one or more driveways. Therefore, Planning Department staff recommend that Condition No. 34 be required to ensure that additional pedestrian/wheelchair access is established in areas where pedestrians or wheelchair users would not be in conflict with vehicle traffic. Access Driveways: The applicants have requested that primary access to the project site be permitted from a forty-foot wide driveway located along the Airport Park Boulevard frontage. The City Engineer reviewed the proposed driveway and noted that the proposed width and radius of this driveway would be adequate for egress from the site and for vehicles traveling north on Airport Park Boulevard to turn onto the site. However, the City Engineer also expressed concern that the location of this driveway could contribute to an increase in the number of traffic accidents in the area if vehicles attempt to complete a U-turn from the south-bound lane of Airport Park Boulevard into the north-bound lane in order to use this driveway. Therefore, the Engineering Department has recommended that Condition No. 42 be adopted to ensure that ingress and egress from this driveway is restricted to an exit-only driveway if the number of vehicle accidents resulting from vehicles attempting a U-turn at the median island is five or more within a period of twelve consecutive months. This condition has been discussed with applicants, who have indicated they are amenable to its approval. A second access driveway would be located on the southern boundary of the project site, which would require that ingress and egress be permitted by the owner of the property to the south. The applicants for this project have indicated that an access easement with the owners of this property has been completed to allow the construction of the twenty-eight foot wide access drive on this property. This easement would also permit the installation of additional parking stalls, landscaping and sidewalk improvements on this property. Planning Department staff recommend that Condition No. 43 be adopted to ensure that these improvements will remain a part of the proposed development so long as the site is used for the proposed uses. Minimum Parking Requirements: The parking standards for the AlP Ordinance require that an adequate number of off-street parking stalls be provided to accommodate the needs of employees, visitors and company vehicles. It also permits the Planning Commission to allow a deviation from the parking standards of the Ukiah Zoning Code on a case-by-case basis, but it is the opinion of Planning Department staff that there is no reason to reduce the standard parking requirements for convenience stores and restaurants. Staff used these standard requirements to calculate that the total number of parking spaces for both of the proposed uses would be a minimum of forty off-street parking stalls. The applicants have proposed to construct forty-four parking stalls for use by the proposed convenience store and restaurant, but nine of these stalls would be located on the adjacent parcel to the south. Project applicants have indicated that the existing access easement would also permit the construction of these stalls, but Planning staff recommend that Condition No. 44 be adopted to ensure that the additional parking stalls are installed and maintained for use by patrons of the proposed development. Signage: The project site consists of a single parcel with two street frontages, and the total sign area permitted for development on the lot would be 500 square feet, according to the Sign Code provisions of the Municipal Code. Planning staff confirmed that the total area proposed for signs on this site would be approximately 486 square feet. Staff also calculated the allowed sign area for each of the proposed structures on the site based on the sizes of the parcels that would be created if the tentative minor subdivision of the site is completed by the approval of a Parcel Map. Based on available street frontage, the building and freestanding signs proposed for the proposed restaurant and auto service station uses would comply with Sign Code provisions. The proposed pole sign that would be located on the southeast corner of the project site would be thirty feet high and 200 square feet in area. Generally, the maximum height of any sign on a project site cannot exceed the maximum height of the highest structure located on the site, which in this case is twenty-four feet high. The proposed pole sign can, however, be permitted to a maximum height of thirty feet by the approval of the Site Development Permit application. It is the opinion of Planning Department staff that the proposed pole sign should not be approved as part of the development permitted on the site. This opinion is based on the fact that the sign is clearly oriented toward freeway travelers on Highway 101, and does not, therefore, comply with Sign Code provisions (Section 3260) that prohibit the construction of signs adjacent to a landscaped freeway if it is oriented toward the users of the freeway. Planning staff's recommendation that the proposed pole sign not be permitted is also based on the recognized City Council policy to discourage freestanding signs within the industrial approved generally of Airport park. In fact, no freestanding signs have been permitted in previously development projects in this area, although the area of building signs has been increased to ensure that businesses can be clearly identified by users Park Boulevard and the freeway. The Planning Department does recommend that the proposed identification and price sign that would be located on the southwest corner of the project site be approved as part of the sign program for the site. This freestanding sign is required by State statutes for the posting of gasoline prices, and would be consistent with the scale of the overall project development. In addition, it is anticipated that its location at the southwest corner of the site would encourage vehicle drivers to enter the site at the southern driveway entrance. Design Guidelines Planning staff also reviewed the project to ensure that it is consistent with the design guidelines required in Section H of the AlP Ordinance. Based on this review, staff determined that the proposed development would be consistent with requirements for landscaping, architectural design and the orientation and location of buildings. The project is not entirely consistent with provisions for building exteriors, lighting and design amenities, as discussed below. Building Exteriors: The AlP ordinance requires that colors and building materials be carefully selected to ensure that they are compatible with surrounding developments. It is the opinion of staff that all of the proposed structures utilize colors and materials that are generally consistent with each other and with existing development in the AlP. Planning Department staff noted that the proposed restaurant structure would be outlined with neon tubing, which is prohibited by Sign Code Section 3226(K). This neon tubing may be permitted by the approval of the City Council since the AlP ordinance requires that signage generally comply with sign code requirements, but it is the opinion of Planning staff that this tubing would not be consistent with other building exteriors in the AlP area, or the City, in general. Therefore, staff recommends that it be prohibited in accordance with Sign Code provisions. Lighting: The AlP ordinance requires that a comprehensive lighting plan be submitted as part of the Site Development Permit application, but none has been included with project site plans. Project applicants have indicated that no major lighting sources would be required on the project site due to its size and the locations of structure on the site, but staff recommend that Condition Nos. 37 and 38 be required to ensure that any lighting installed on the site does not cause on-site or off-site glare, particularly toward the Highway 101 frontage. Design Amenities: The AlP requires that bicycle parking be provided near the entrances to buildings, including one space for each ten employees and one space for each fifty automobile parking stalls. Project applicants have indicated that the exact number of employees has not been determined, and that bicycle parking could be established once this number has been established. Therefore, Planning Department staff recommend that Condition No. 23 be required to ensure that bicycle parking facilities are installed prior to occupancy of the proposed structures. The ordinance also requires that other design amenities be included, if appropriate. In this case, it is the opinion of the Planning Department that one or more benches be installed in the area located directly to the south of the proposed restaurant building, and that this area be maintained for customers of both the restaurant and the convenience store. This requirement is outlined in proposed Condition No. 44. Traffic The EIR prepared for the Airport Industrial Park was completed with the assumption that the subject property would be used for a five thousand square foot sit-down restaurant rather than the proposed auto service station use and drive-thru restaurant. Based on this change, the Planning and Engineering Department contracted with a private engineering firm to conduct an analysis to determine if the proposed development would generate substantially different traffic impacts than those reviewed in the EIR. This analysis determined that the proposed development would generate approximately 150 more vehicle trips at the site during peak p.m. hours, but that no additional measures would be required to mitigate potential impacts caused by traffic from this site. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis prepared by Planning Department staff determined that the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the Ukiah Valley General Plan, and meets or exceeds most of the applicable use and development requirements for the development of commercial structures in the Airport Industrial Park. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for approval of the proposed project, including the ordinance amendment and Site Development Permit, is based, in part, on the following findings: , The project is consistent with a "Highway Oriented Commercial" land use classification, in that a service station with a convenience store, and a restaurant with a drive-thru window are very typical aspects of a land use expressly intended to serve the highway commuting public; . The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the design and development standards contained in the adopted Airport Industrial Park Planned Development (AlP PD) Ordinance; . The project is within the scope of the certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the industrial park (dated July, 1995), and, indeed, an independent traffic analysis prepared for the subject project confirms that its projected traffic would not result in impacts beyond those already addressed in the established mitigation program; and o The project is compatible with the adopted Ukiah Valley General Plan, in that the industrial park is shown as a "Master Plan Area", otherwise embodied in the AlP PD Ordinance, and the subject site is specifically called out as a "Highway Oriented Commercial" land use designation. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Site Development Permit #97-03, 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 and to any supporting documents submitted therewith. (SC #1) . Any construction, and the location thereof, shall conform to any maps, sketches, or plot plans accompanying the application or submitted by applicant in support thereof. (SC #2) . 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 o . o , , , 10. 11. 12. 13. imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Planning Commission such standards shall be met. (SC #3) In addition to any particular condition which might be imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances. (SC #4) Applicant shall be required to obtain any approval which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance. (SC #5) Building permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the site development permit or same shall be null and void. 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 impact the project. (SC #6) If any use permitted shall cease for six (6) consecutive months, then the right to any site development permit permitting such use shall terminate and such variance or use permit shall be revocable by the granting body. If any condition, special or standard, is violated or if any required approval is not obtained, then the site development permit granted shall be null and void; otherwise to continue in full force and effect indefinitely until otherwise terminated and shall run with the land. Except as otherwise specifically noted, any site development permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving such site development permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. The applicant shall provide a grant of easement for roadways, drainage and public utilities in accordance with improvement plans previously approved or required by the Director of Public Works. All curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street paving which are broken or damaged or driveways which will not be used are to be removed and replaced as required by the City Engineer. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" of asphalt concrete with a 6" aggregate base, or an approved option. On-site drainage shall be to the approval of the City Engineer. 10 14. All work within the City right-of-way shall be performed by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License. Contractor must submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability, $1,000,000; Property Damage, $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. 15. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department is required to perform all work within the street right-of-way. 16. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion, and drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. 17. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Department of Public Utility. 18. Street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees shall be as per the City Engineer's recommendations. 19. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and ventilation apparatus be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building on which it is located. 20. Any outdoor refuse/recycle containers be aesthetically screened from view. Garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosure. Air Quality 21. All exposed or disturbed soil shall be regularly watered to avoid the transportation of dust. 22. Every attempt shall be made to keep all construction areas swept and clear of mud and debris. 23. Bicycle parking facilities shall be installed near the entrance to the buildings prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy. 24. All tenants of the project buildings shall participate in a Transportation Management Association when it is formed. Noise 25. Construction equipment shall be properly muffled and maintained. 11 26. Hours of construction be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Fire Protection 27. All development shall be constructed according to the requirements of the City Fire Department, including, but not limited to the design and installation of a fire sprinkler system. 28. No-parking zones shall be established and maintained in accordance with the Ukiah Fire Code. Sewage/Wastewater Disposal 29. The detailed construction plans submitted for a building permit shall include water conservation devices on toilets, urinals, and faucets. 30. The applicants shall pay the required sewer/water connection fees at the time of application for service. 31. Sewage collectors for the project shall be sized and constructed according to the requirements of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District. Schools 32. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit(s), the applicant or other developers of the project site shall pay the required Ukiah School District fees applicable to their commercial development projects. Landscaping 33. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a final landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City Planning Director for review and approval. Pedestrian Linkage 34. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicants or other developers shall submit a detailed plan for creating a pedestrian link between the proposed project, and the WalMart retail store to the south. The plan shall include, but not be limited to the installation of crosswalks and sidewalk extensions that would permit patrons of the proposed structures on the site to access these structures without walking through unmarked access driveways. The plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the Planning Director. 12 Recycling 36. Prior to final inspection and the grant of occupancy the applicants or other developers of the site shall prepare and submit separate recycling plans/statements to the City Planning Department for review and approval. The Plans/statements shall include, but not be limited to provisions for recycling cardboard and other recyclable products used by the applicants. Visual Quality 37. 38. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, joint or separate lighting plans shall be submitted to the City Planning Department for review and approval. Exterior lighting associated with the project shall include shielded, non-glare types of lights. Sign lighting shall be kept to an absolute minimum. Geology/Soils 39. Prior to the commencement of site preparation and construction activities, the applicants shall submit a detailed geotechnical report of the site. The analysis shall be conducted by a registered engineering geologist or geological engineer. Field and laboratory data should be analyzed to provide the following geotechnical information: ao A description of the soil and geologic conditions observed, including faulting and landsliding. b. Site grading recommendations. c. Recommended foundation types and design criteria. d. Retaining wall design criteria, as necessary. e. Recommendations for slab-on-grade construction, as applicable. f. Geotechnical engineering drainage recommendations. The applicants shall construct the project per the recommendations contained in the geotechnical investigation. 40. All proposed Structures/facilities shall comply with current seismic design standards contained in the Uniform Building Code. 13 Hydrology 41. Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the applicants shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and secure a General Construction Activity Permit, if necessary. Access and Parking 42. The forty-foot wide driveway located along the Airport Park Boulevard frontage for the subject property shall be restricted to an "exit-only" driveway if the City Engineer determines that five or more accidents have occurred in a period of twelve consecutive months as the result of vehicles that are southbound on Airport Park Boulevard making a U-turn at the median islands or turning onto the site from the north-bound lane. 43. Verification of an access easement to allow ingress and egress across the WalMart property to the south of the subject property shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the approval of occupancy permits. 44. A Parking Agreement to allow off-site parking spaces on the WalMart property to the south of the subject property shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning Director prior to the approval of occupancy permits. Design Amenities 44. One or more park benches shall be installed in the area located to the south of the proposed restaurant structure or in an area approved by the Planning Director. 45. All conditions be completed prior to release of final inspection and issuance of use and occupancy permit. ATTACHMENTS: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. Location Map Site Plan Restaurant Elevations (East and South) & Signs Restaurant Elevations (West and North) & Signs Convenience Store Elevations (North and East) & Signs Convenience Store Elevations (South and West) & Signs Canopy Elevations (West and South) & Signs Preliminary Landscape Plan Planting Legend Freestanding Sign Elevations and Sign Schedule 14 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS' The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Bob Sawyer, Planning Director 2:PRCMIN\COMMENT 15 Telrnege F~Oec~ I I I I Existing WsI-Msrt parking · . Z 0 w w W z 0 Z 0 W W .... . .' ' '/'r · ... o, o. · · · . ,' ::'... · .* : · . Z i-i · o -. · . · .. t Z o. : · · · -o :. o. ,, i i ! Il i i ~tGH PC)4..[ , ,I ,i 'FOOOMAR1~ BUILDING .~GN Y 22.33 2 44 66 'CAR WA~' BU~NG ~ Y 11.~ I 11.50 '[~' ~ING ~ Y 14.33 I 14.33 ~[LL L~ CAN~Y ~ Y 4 ~ 2 ~ELL L~ ~N~ ~ Y 225 6 155 ,, ~ANNER '~1' ~T~RS Y 7.19 6 43.14 'JACK-IN-~E-BOX' ~NG ~GN Y 24 91 3 74.43 p~[ ~ Y ~2~.~ 1 2~.~ M~UMENT ~ Y 39.'~ I 39.~ ,,,i . . . 10'-0' IW-0' , ~E~ RED BACKhaND · W~C~ ~LLOW L~ . . . . ~WAY · ' . · PO~ ~ 'B' ~'-O' ~ ~ELL RED I: 6ACKGR~ND ~ MAGENTA ~ BACKhaND 11 ! ilOl'~ LET~RS ~ ~~ I ~ ~E~ ~LLOw ~111 I I I I I Il I.I I I Il I I I I.I I I Ill~l h~ ! I . ! I ! ,I ~ ~T rACE C~ ~ .. MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION February 26, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT Eric Larson Joe Chiles Mike Correll Jennifer Puser Judy Pruden, Chairman MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Charles Stump, Senior Planner Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Marge Giuntoli, Recording Secretary OTHERS PRESENT Tom Brown Tod Brown Peter Bucklin Pete Carter Glen Donalson Wayne Fackrell Kate Gould Mike Heaney Jim McGrath Sue Nomura Dennis O'Keefe Cathy Pacini Ida Pittman Tiffany Reynolds Warren Sawyers Chuck Shaw Mike Shutz Pat Stefani Dean Thomquist The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Judy Pruden at 7:02 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 Commissioners and determined each had made the required site visits. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -January 22, 1997 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carded by the following roll call vote to approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 22, 1997, as amended: Commissioner Larson made the following correction: Page 3. Paragraph 7. 1st Sentence. amend to read: "Mr. Kennedy stated Condition #6 called for relocating the signal either at Scott or Norton to Clara and State Streets." MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page I February 26, 1997 Discussion followed regarding the next to the last sentence in Paragraph 8, Page 17, wherein it was determined that although Mr. Dolan "noted the Commission's actions to upzone Empire Gardens to an R-2 are not going to help the affordable housing, especially in areas that can easily be accessed by walking and handicap access," Mr. Dolan mispoke and the action was not actually taken by the Planning Commission. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. Chairman Pruden explained that beginning with this meeting, there would be an informational packet regarding agendized items available for use by the audience, to allow for a more complete understanding of the issues being discussed. This packet will be located, with additional copies of the agenda and "draft" minutes, in the plastic holders to the right of the Council Chamber's entrance, and is to remain for use in the Chamber only. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON,AGENDA ITEMS No one came forward. 6. APPEAL PROCESS Chairman Pruden read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is March 10, 1997. e PROJECT REVIEW Use Permit A_r)_r)lication No. 97-06, as submitted by Tori Brown, to allow an expansion of an existing playground at a preschoolldaycare facility by 6,017 square feet and to allow the number of children permitted to use the playground to be increased from 14 to 48, on a parcel located in the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District at 465 Luce Avenue (Assessor Parcel No. 003-061-04 & 22). Associate Planner Lohse provided an overview of the written staff report, including a synopsis of the history for Use Permit No. 94-28 for the Little Friends Preschool and Day Care Center, approved by the Planning Commission on October 26, 1994. The Conditions of Approval for this permit required the approval of a parking plan for school use, a maximum occupancy of 50 children and seven employees, and a maximum of 14 children at one time using the playground between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Mondays through Fridays. The proposed Use Permit has been applied for to allow the center to use a second playground area that was installed in violation of the original Use Permit's conditions. This playground currently contains a playset and open areas, and the site plan submitted with the application indicates that a large lawn area surrounded by a bike path would be installed in the future. The applicant has also requested that Condition No. 4 of Use Permit No. 94-28 be modified to allow the minimum number of children that are permitted to use the playground to be increased from 14 to 30 children during regular school operations, and from 14 to 48 children during meals and special group activities. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 February 26, 1997 Mr. Lohse further advised that staff reviewed the project and determined that the proposed minor expansion of the playground facilities would be consistent with the use and development standards that could be applied to preschool/daycare uses in the R-1 Zoning District. Staff also reviewed other potential impacts examined in its analysis for the previously approved use permit and determined that potential impacts associated with traffic and parking would not be exacerbated by the approval of this project. Planning staff is, however, concerned with the potential for increased noise levels on the site, particularly those caused by children using the playground facilities. Although there is no evidence that the increased noise levels would cause persons injury or other health problems, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the anticipated noise increases from additional children using existing and proposed playground areas would cause substantial nuisance impacts for residents on adjoining parcels. It is possible that solid sound walls or other noise attenuation measures could be constructed by the applicant to mitigate these impacts, but it is likely that the required height and bulk of these structures would be inconsistent with development standards for the R-1 Zoning District. Therefore, the Planning Department recommends that the proposed playground expansion and allowance for additional children on playground areas be denied. Commissioner Larson commented regarding the accuracy of the traffic analysis performed for the project, clarified that the enrollment would be 48 children and 7 staff on the premises at any one time, and inquired if the possibility existed that the total enrollment of 50 could actually be 100 part- time children. Discussion followed wherein it was noted the current Use Permit states "50 children," and there is no increase projected. Theoretically there could be more than 50 children enrolled if some were pad-time; Ms. Brown is licensed for 50 children. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:15 p.m. Wayne Fackrell, 474 Observatory Avenue, stated the playground was not on the original use permit, and that he was not opposed to day care facilities, but was opposed to having them in an R-1 residential neighborhood. He further stated that having 48 children in his back yard was unacceptable to him, and that he had previously counted 27 children on the playground at one time. The neighbors are in opposition to the increased noise level, and with the activities at the church, there is no peace and quiet at any time. He wants it stopped. Mike Heaney, 476 Observatory Avenue, stated he resided adjacent to the new playground area. There are never only 14 children on the playground, they are still there after 5:30 p.m., and create constant noise. The rules must be adhered to. Glen Donalson, 463 Luce Avenue, referenced his letter, and stated his property was next to and in front of the church property. He noted there is a lot of traffic during the noon hour and in the late afternoon, and reiterated the previous speakers' comments. The day care has gone as far as it should go in an R-1 neighborhood. Warren Sawyers, 1081 Helen Avenue, stated originally the real injustice of the situation was perpetrated by the Planning Commissioners; there is no buffer zone between people's private MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 February 26, 1997 property and the playground area. The noise factor is a major criteria, and the Planning Commission should never have approved the use permit to begin with. Although he does not disagree with the day care venture, he opposes the expansion because of the noise factor. Sue Nomura, 3800 North State Street, #94, stated she was a parent who utilized the day care center, and that usually her children are the last to be picked up. She has often found them waiting for her inside the building when she comes to get them at 5:00 p.m. Tom Brown, 1345 Laurel Avenue, representing his wife, applicant Tod Brown, stated that the day care is a non-profit organization. They are attempting to eliminate having 14 children on the playground on a rotating basis for the entire day, and instead allow all of the children outside at one time. Thus there will be minimal times when there is noise, rather than constant noise all day long. It was his understanding they had use of the lawn area previously; if an additional use permit is necessary, they will get it. They are not asking for more enrollment; the set volume is fine for them. They simply want to have all the children out at one time, with peace and quiet in between. The Commissioners queried the applicant regarding the structure on the map by the lawn area, how they limit the number of children to 14 on the playground at one time, whether the expansion would mean a reduction in the number of hours children would be outside, and if the use permit limited enrollment to 50 children and 7 staff. Mr. Brown replied the structure in question is a piece of wooden playground equipment with slides and bars. The children are limited by their class structure, and staff has resolved the playground control issues that existed. He reiterated they are attempting to create a good, safe place for children, with all of them on the playground at the same time, similar to regular school recesses. He further stated that people are misunderstanding that they want to increase their enrollment from 14 to 48 children; they already have the 48 children and simply want to consolidate the time they are outside. The children are presently supervised under a rotating staff of 5 people, with 3 typically present at any one time. The Commissioners continued to query the applicant regarding playground schedules, the number of actual hours per day the children would be outside, other groups who use the facility, and the number of preschoolers at the center during normal school hours of 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Mr. Brown replied there was no set schedule yet planned for the increased number of children on the playground, but that they would be outside approximately 4 hours a day, including lunch, snack and play times. After 5:30 p.m., the church, which houses the facility, has their own activities. There are approximately 20 to 25 preschoolers in attendance during school hours, with 15 children returning to the facility after school. Pastor Dean Thornquist, representing Calvary Baptist Church, asked for clarification of the issue they were addressing. Mr. Lohse replied the Commission was addressing the expansion of the facilities, and whether the number of children that can use the playground at any one time can be increased. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 February 26, 1997 Pastor Thornquist stated the church owns property that protrudes toward Helen Avenue which they use for parking for approximately 100 vehicles and a traffic turnaround; much of the traffic does not come through the church area. On the plot plan the parking spaces numbered 21 to 32, between the buildings, are blocked with cones so the preschoolers can ride their bikes in that area. This will cut down considerably on the back noise. Commissioner Larson clarified that the game square painted on the driveway was used by the church. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:40 p.m. Chairman Pruden stated she was on the Planning Commission in 1994 when the original use permit was approved, and that the neighborhood voiced no objections at that time. Ms. Brown made a great many promises to the Planning Commission, one of them being that she would be a good neighbor and work out all problems with the neighborhood regarding the day care. Although there was no negative input two years ago, in the space of 28 months Ms. Brown has managed to alienate several blocks of neighbors. Chairman Pruden expressed her concern and stated she felt Ms. Brown had not kept her word to the Planning Commission that she gave 2 years ago, and is uncertain why. She takes the 4 pages of petition signatures from the neighbors seriously. Upon visiting the site recently at 7:45 a.m., she found the entire neighborhood awake from this activity; there were cars going, doors slamming, and dogs barking. This is not a quiet project, and that is why there are use permits. Use permits are conditional upon being a good neighbor. The promises given to staff and the Planning Commission at the time of the original use permit have not been honored. Commissioner Chiles stated the type of facilities Ms. Brown uses are usually limited to 12 children in a residential area, and he would not have approved the original use permit if he had been on the Commission at that time. He does not support the expansion, although he understands her need to have the children together at the lunch hour. VVhat Chairman Pruden has said regarding the day care's impact on the neighborhood causes him to believe the situation should not become any worse. Commissioner Puser stated she sympathized with the applicant, but that it seems as if a significant number of the neighbors are impacted by the noise, and that the location of the day care center for that number of children appears to present a problem in this particular residential area. Commissioner Correll commented he thought the facilities were wonderful, but were in the wrong location in an R-1 zoning area. Commissioner Larson stated he tended to agree with Commissioner Chiles in that day care facilities in residential areas should be limited to a small number of children. However, it was not limited previously, and the Browns have invested a lot of time and money in this center that is not compatible with their neighbors. He recommended the Commissioners act to "deny without prejudice," which would allow the applicant to work out a solution that is acceptable to the neighborhood, instead of involving the City at this point. If they can find a way to impact the neighborhood less intensely with a specific plan for mitigations of the noise problem, the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page $ February 26, 1997 Commission could reconsider this application. If the Commissioners act to deny the project, the only option open to the applicant is to appeal to the City Council. Chairman Pruden addressed the audience, stating that a use permit is conditional upon being a good neighbor. The people have made their feelings very clear that this project is a problem in their neighborhood, and it would behoove the applicant to resolve the problems. This petition is extensive and far-reaching. If the neighborhood continues to have problems, they have the legal right to come forward for a revocation hearing, which revokes the use permit and removes the ability to do this business in this location. That is one of the things that can occur when the use has demonstrated that it is not compatible to the neighborhood. Senior Planner Stump stated that revocation of the use permit would be predicated on a violation of said permit, and that to date staff has been unable to identify actual violations. Revocation would require detailed work and clear, documentable violation of the use permit. Chairman Pruden stated the neighborhood has made the intent clear that if they have to do that to solve the problem, they will. It was her hope that the applicant understands the seriousness of the neighbors' concerns. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Larson, seconded by Commissioner Pruden, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to deny without prejudice Use Permit Application No. 97-06, as submitted by Tori Brown, and that within a 6 month time frame the applicant can return, at no financial cost, with a potential solution before the Planning Commission. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. 7B. Ordinance Amendment A_r)_r)lication No, 97-02, as submitted by Robert H. Lee and Associates, to allow the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance (No. 979) to be amended by the deletion of language that excludes drive-thru restaurants from the list of allowed uses for properties designated as Highway Commercial, on property located at 1105 Airport Park Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 180-070-36. Associate Planner Lohse reviewed the written staff report, and advised that Tentative Minor Subdivision Map No. 97-04 had been approved by the City Engineer; however, the parcel map has not been received and as of this date the site still remains as one parcel. Discussion followed regarding C-2 zoning, and the assumption that a sit-down and a drive-thru restaurant would have the same traffic numbers and thus the same impact fees. Staff noted that a drive-thru restaurant would generate more traffic, but that the fee structures for the capital improvement program for the Airport Industrial Park had not been established because the fee had not been determined by the City Council. In buildout of the Park, a drive-thru restaurant would not erode the levels of service at the intersection any more than a sit-down restaurant. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 February 26, 1997 Commissioner Puser inquired regarding the recommendation from the Air Quality Management Board. Mr. Lohse replied the Board is generally opposed to all drive-thru operations because of their contention that cars idling in drive-thru lanes generate more pollutants. However, their analysis is incomplete and the information is unsubstantiated. When asked if they were prepared to oppose all drive-thru lanes, and not just for this project, the Board replied they were not prepared to say that at this time. Senior Planner Stump commented that the Commission knows there was a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the buildout of the Airport Industrial Park, and that the EIR clearly stated there would naturally be air impacts. A series of mitigations was developed for air quality impacts resulting from buildout of the Park, and they have been applied to this project. The EIR assumed larger retail commercial development than has actually happened. Commissioner Larson commented he was curious how this prohibition came about and when it was included in this zone. Mr. Stump replied it had been an unwritten City Council policy, without any adopted law or regulation, not to have drive-thrus. It was not until the Ordinance was amended in August, 1995, that the unwritten policy was codified. The desire has always been for a sit-down restaurant on this site; the current property owner has unsuccessfully attempted for two years to secure one. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 8:11 p.m. Chuck Shaw, Real Estate Manager for Jack-In-The-Box Restaurants, briefly reviewed the proposed project, and stated there was a recent study showing that automobiles with catalytic converters that idled for 7 to 10 minutes at drive-thrus generally released less pollution than restarted parked vehicles. In response to queries from the Commissioners, Mr. Shaw further stated his company is seeking to target a blended population, both local and highway, and that they do not engage in non drive-thru facilities, whereas some of the other fast food companies will franchise for walk-up facilities, such as are contained in minimarts. Jack-In-The-Box accommodates seating for 90 in their facility, so that people who do not wish to avail themselves of the drive-thru feature can dine leisurely. Peter Bucklin, PMB Development Co., applauded staff for their input, which has culminated in a viable, appropriate development for the area, given the proximity to the freeway and the established retail ventures. Although he is aware of the preference for a sit-down restaurant and has contacted over 100 companies supplying that service, the site and market are not sufficient to gain their interest; the needs are not there. The proposed uses are the best for that particular location and for the existing marketplace. The Commissioners queried Mr. Bucklin regarding what things were lacking for a sit-down restaurant, single counter franchise operations within minimarts, and if the gas station will be constructed if the drive-thru restaurant is not approved. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 February 26, 1997 Mr. Bucklin replied the demographics of the Ukiah Valley do not support the volume needed by a sit-down restaurant. The population base must be at least 75,000; the additional highway traffic is not enough. Fast food operations contained within convenience stores/minimarts are commonly known as "infills." They are not installed with the purpose of replacing a full drive-thru, and there are usually other drive-thrus in the immediate vicinity. He further replied that the construction of the proposed gas station is critical to this project; they have exhausted all other variations. The configuration and size of the site only allow a certain combination of uses. Commissioner Larson clarified that Wal-Mart was the previous owner of the property, and that it was purchased with the drive-thru restriction in place. Mr. Shaw commented that many of the existing quick service restaurants, while freeway oriented, are also adjacent to retail generation uses. The cost of development for fuel operators is becoming extremely expensive, and they are looking for an opportunity to augment their income. Many dealers have augmented that income with other food type uses, which they franchise. Mike Shutz, Park Place, Ukiah, inquired of staff if, prior to this applicant, other people requiring a drive-thru on their establishment had asked to purchase this property. He further inquired if there had ever been a survey attempt to indicate or prove to any of the sit-down restaurants that our community would support this type of operation, instead of going the opposite way of asking if they would come here, but not state the reasons for asking. Mr. Stump replied that in his experience, he was only approached by Jack-In-The-Box in terms of drive-thru restaurants. Although he was unaware of any survey, he and Planning Director Sawyer had fielded calls the past three years from interested sit-down restaurant people, and attempted not only to answer their inquiries regarding population figures but informed them that such a restaurant is needed in this community and is the preference of the City Council. Discussion followed regarding drive-thru restaurants and the reality of the marketplace. It was noted that this application was not made arbitrarily, and that the proposed location is a logical place for this type of use, not an impact to local residents, and not placed in an area to attempt to capture a competitor's business. Pete Carter, 191 Cherry Street, stated he was not in favor of the project. There used to be a service station at every comer, and now it looks as if there will be a drive-thru restaurant at every corner. The Ordinance should remain as it is. Mr. Bucklin ;ommented on the domino effect of development, and stated that this project provides services and is the best use for the site. With the continuation of the retail business development to the south, the possibility of a dinner house may be "just around the corner." There is a much higher probability of securing a dinner establishment with the development of the corner offering services. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:45 p.m. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 February 26, 1997 Commissioner Chiles clarified that the project had been reviewed by the City's Public Safety Department, stated he agreed with staff that this area is highway commercial, and voiced his support of the amendment. Commissioner Puser stated she was opposed to the amendment, because if a dinner house is "just around the corner," then they should wait for the dinner house; there is no need for another fast food restaurant. It is unfortunate that the people who bought the property were not aware of the exclusion. Drive-thru types of businesses promote an automobile culture. Commissioner Correll stated he agreed with staff regarding the location for this project. Although he is not particularly excited about a drive-thru restaurant, he agrees it is actually a good site for this particular application and supports the amendment. Commissioner Larson stated that staff's argument that drive-thru facilities are legitimate or allowed uses in other highway commercial zones does not justify changing this particular piece of property. It begs the question whether drive-thrus are necessary; in his opinion they do not enhance the community. The entire issue of drive-thru restaurants and the type of market it creates has to be examined. He further stated he questioned the domino development theory. If the property remains vacant, the increasing retail market ventures to the south may help the chances for a sit-down restaurant on the site. He is not in favor of reactive planning, that is, reacting to a market situation rather than to what is good land use planning in this community. He does not support a drive-thru use on this parcel. Chairman Pruden stated she did not like the site development plan and therefore could not approve the project. There have been too many amendments for site development at the Park, which limits any sense of future planning. She would prefer to see a regular restaurant at that location, and has a concern about another drive-thru there. Philosophically, amending the planned development at the Park every time there is a new project has got to be stopped, and she cannot support another amendment. Mr. Stump reviewed what he had determined to be the Commissioners' findings in support of their decision. He urged them not to make a finding related to the notion that they do not want to amend the Planned Development Ordinance; the property owners have the right to pursue amending it. If the amendment were supported, changes could be made to the site plan if the Commission considers it unacceptable. He suggested that, for the benefit of the applicants, the Commissioners state their findings/reasons supporting their conclusions. Chairman Pruden referenced staff's findings in their report, and stated she was unable to find a compelling reason or a rational, logical explanation to amend the Ordinance; there is no compelling argument for that action. Although she is in agreement that a restaurant at that location is consistent with highway oriented commercial, she does not believe that a drive-thru operation is the only compatible alternative. Mr. Stump stated that the General Plan designates the property as Master Plan area, and the adopted Planned Development Ordinance functions as the Master Plan. The highway commercial designation in the PD Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan. Although the City Council will MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 February 26, 1997 ~O be required to make their own findings regarding the amendment, he suggested the Commissioners refine their reasons for the Council's benefit. Commissioner Larson stated he took issue with the statement that the Commission has to make findings to expand the land use; it is not their obligation. They do not have to 'arrive at findings to justify observations. Chairman Pruden.inquired regarding the process for proceeding with the next agenda item of site development discussion, and whether the preference was to complete the discussion now, or at a later date, should the Council approve the Ordinance amendment. Mr. Stump suggested the discussion occur as scheduled to give the City Council the benefit of that discussion. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Larson, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to deny Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02, based on the reasons discussed above. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Puser, and Chairman Pruden. Commissioners Chiles and Correll. None. None. RECESS: 9:06 p.m. RECONVENE: 9:20 p.m. 7C. Site Development Permit Application No 97-03, as submitted by Robert H. Lee and Associates, to allow the construction of an auto service station and convenience store, a drive-thru restaurant and a thirty-foot high pole sign on a 1.38 acre parcel located in a portion of the Airport Industrial Park designated for Highway Commercial land uses in the AlP Planned Development Ordinance (No. 979), on property located at 1105 Airport Park Boulevard (Assessor Parcel No. 180-070-36. Senior Planner Stump reiterated that the Planning Commission had voted to recommend denial of the amendment to the AlP Planned Developed Ordinance, but would discuss Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 in the event the City Council approved said amendment. Associate Planner Lohse dispensed with the lengthy staff report, and advised that the proposed Permit would allow the commercial development of the site, including a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru window and an auto service station with six pump islands, a convenience store, and a car wash. The applicants have also requested approval of a 200 square foot pole sign with a proposed maximum height of 30 feet. He further advised that the traffic analysis showed the project would increase traffic by 150 trips per day; however, that level is not sufficient to be mitigated. Staff does not recommend approval of the pole sign, but does support the majority of the sign program. In past projects, the City Council has allowed larger than normal building signage rather than pole signs. The standard sign code provisions prohibit the sign from being viewed from the freeway. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 February 26, 1997 The Commissioners queried staff regarding bicycle lanes, alternatives to the pole sign, access along Airport Park Boulevard, and staff's concerns regarding the driveway location by to the intersection. Staff replied the Ordinance requires Class 3 bicycle lanes and that Talmage Road is targeted for bike lanes in the future. Most of the buildings in the Park have larger signs on the set back buildings. Staff is proposing elimination of the pole sign. There are still concerns regarding the access. Discussion followed relative to the potentially hazardous situations at the intersection, including the possibility of more accidents due to increased traffic, and sight blockage caused by the redwood trees. Staff explained that the ingress and egress into the Wal-Mart area on the south was for the purpose of a secondary access to provide direct access to the Wal-Mart site and to provide a more reasonable alternative to turning left on Airport Park Boulevard. The existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk would be moved, together with the landscaping, which will be replaced to conceal the car wash. There are certain restrictions on the site because the Ordinance does not permit any entrances on Talmage; however, drivers will have three options to exit. Staff noted that the applicants believe the circulation plan, while not optimum, will work for them. Commissioner Chiles noted he would like to see more windows in the buildings to alleviate the "big box" look. Further discussion followed relative to parking, with staff noting that the parking lots conform with the parking standards, with allowed back-up space. Staff clarified the location of the property line. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 9:44 p.m. Peter Bucklin, PMB Development Co., stated they agreed with the findings and staff recommendations and mitigations, with the exception of the pole sign. He expressed disappointment with the Commission's earlier action on the Ordinance amendment, and is uncertain of what other options exist, if any. The Commission queried Mr. Bucklin regarding the necessary easements, whether the gas station will be in private hands, and the responsibility for maintenance of the landscaping and parking medians. Mr. Bucklin assured the Commissioners they had secured all the required easements, that the station will be a Shell station operated by Golden Gate Petroleum and that both Jack-In-The-Box and Mr. O'Keefe's organization would be responsible for the maintenance of the medians. Chuck Shaw, Jack-In-The-Box Restaurants, stated they will remove the neon from the building and reserve the opportunity to work with staff on the matter of the sign, which is necessary since the highway interchange and the existing buildings hide the site. He does not have an alternative design for the sign at this time. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 February 26, 1997 Discussion followed regarding the concrete sign for the Redwood Business Park, located at the corner of Talmage Road and Airport Park Boulevard. It was determined that the sign will probably be removed; however, Mr. Akerstrom indicated to staff that he does have an easement for it. The Commission could recommend that landscaping be done around the sign. Further discussion followed regarding outdoor seating for the restaurant, wherein it was noted that Jack-In-The-Box traditionally offers outdoor seating for their customers, depending on the parking ratio and the site plan. For this site, the restaurant could probably accommodate 24 seating areas consisting of polished aggregate concrete furniture with umbrellas. Staff noted they would like to see park benches and seating over the entire site, not just for dining. Chairman Pruden inquired regarding the architecture, including the 3 triangular parapets which rise up above the building. She further inquired regarding the corporate colors on the building design. Mr. Shaw replied the parapets were designed both as a portion of the normal architecture and to blend with the existing buildings in the Park. The standard colors are a charcoal gray mansard roof, and a white building with red accent colors and red signs with white lettering. Chairman Pruden asked if Mr. Shaw were amenable to a few changes in the color scheme, and voiced her dislike of the stark white on the building, preferring instead an off-white or softened white color. Mr. Shaw replied he was unable to answer, because the colors were a part of the overall development design. However, he could approach management with the request. Discussion followed regarding location of the free standing sign, wherein it was noted that if the signage is to be compromised from the applicant's request, frequently Jack-In-The-Box will raise a balloon to bring to staff's attention what is actually visible from the freeway. Dennis O'Keefe, President of Golden Gate Petroleum, stated he concurs with staff findings with the exception of the signage; it is his opinion that it is important to have visibility from the freeway. Referencing the Commission's previous action on the Ordinance amendment, he alleged that his company felt a strong compatibility with Jack-In-The-Box. In addition, their experience has been that car washes complement the gasoline business, and are necessary to offset and pay for the tremendous investments that are required. He further stated that Golden Gate Petroleum represents Shell Oil in certain areas. They have formed a joint venture with Shell, so this particular site would be owned and operated by the joint venture, Golden Gate Holdings. Chairman Pruden inquired relative to where the customers would pay, voiced her concerns regarding the safety of people having to cross the main road to pay for their gas, and asked if the applicants would be willing to have a cashier located near the center of the pumps. Discussion followed regarding the circulation plan on the site. It was noted that the project is designed for efficiency, with the bulk of the customers paying at the pump. Larger vehicles such as motorhomes and trailers will use the outside fueling lanes, and exit accordingly. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 February 26, 1997 Chairman Pruden commented that the colors on the convenience store are not coordinated with the colors on Jack-In-The-Box, and noted that in some areas the chain businesses have changed their corporate designs to accommodate the overall shopping center design in which they are located. She further commented on the lack of sidewalks. Jim McGrath, Robert E. Lee Associates, replied they will change the roofs to be charcoal gray, and have minimized the corporate colors to a simple yellow stripe around the building. · Mr. Bucklin replied there is an existing pedestrian walkway, and they will build another sidewalk in the landscaping when they remove some of that for ingress to Wal-Mart. Mr. Lohse advised that Condition No. 34 addresses the issue of pedestrian linkage, and that the inclusion of pedestrian access onto this site would allow foot traffic from Friedman Bros. to the proposed Jack-In-The-Box. Chairman Pruden asked if the applicants accepted the conditions on the project. She further inquired regarding the hours of operation for the proposed businesses. Mr. Bucklin replied they were accepting of the conditions, except for the recommendation regarding the sign. The hours of operation for both the restaurant and gas station will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 10:34 p.m. Commissioner Chiles commented that the staff and applicants have invested a great deal of time and effort in this project. He would be in favor of recommending approval of the site plan as submitted. Commissioner Correll stated that he commends the staff for their work, but has concerns with the ingress, egress, and density of the project. He would prefer that, due to the safety issues, half of the project be eliminated or else the entire project be moved to the other side of the freeway. Commissioner Puser stated she also had concerns relating to the traffic flow within the project and pedestrians walking to the direct services. It is not the appropriate project for the site. She prefers to continue the search for a sit-down restaurant. Commissioner Larson stated he agreed that this is a too intense use of the project. The significant number of off-site parking spaces tells him someone needs more space than they have and that the use is too intense. Two separate companies mean two separate projects; however, pedestrian safety issues have not been addressed. He further stated he does not like the access onto Airport Park Boulevard; the driveway is too close to the intersection. He prefers to see the primary access from the Wal-Mart property, with an "exit only" onto Airport Park Boulevard. It addition, the internal circulation is confusing. The elimination of the car wash and the drive-thru would eliminate some problems. Things must be scaled back in order for the project to work appropriately. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 13 February 26, '1997 Chairman Pruden stated that it appears there would be too many cars trying to maneuver in the small parking lot. The populace in this area is not sophisticated; they will enter and exit as they see fit. From a planning perspective, this is just too small a lot for all of the things the applicants want to develop. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Puser, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to deny Site Development Permit No. 97-03, based on the reasons discussed above.. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. Commissioner Chiles. None. None. Mr. Stump advised this project will go before the City Council on March 19, 1997. 7D. Rezonincj Application No. 96-52c, as filed by the City Planning Department, to rezone 45 parcels of land to zoning classifications consistent with the Lend Use Designation assigned in the new General Plan. The project involves the rezoning of 25 parcel~ from "R-I" (Single Family Residential) to "R-3" (General Multiple Residential) qenerally located along Luce Avenue between Dora Avenue and State Street, and along the east side of South Street between Luce Avenue and Observatory Avenue; 19 parcels from "R-2" (Multiple Family Residential) to "R-3" generally located alon? Observatory Avenue between Dora Street and South Street; and 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N" (Neighborhood Commercial) located at 202 Washington Avenue. Senior Planner Stump briefly reviewed the proposed zoning changes, and advised that Planning staff recommends against the rezoning of the 25 parcels from "R-l" to "R-3," is supportive of rezoning the 19 parcels from "R-2" to "R-3," and recommends against the rezoning of the 1 parcel from "R-3" to "C-N." He stated he had received a number of correspondences that are consistent with staff's recommendations. The Commissioners waived their questions of staff and acted on each of the rezonings separately. Item No. 1:R-1 to R-3 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 10:53 p.m. Kate Gould, 230 Luce Avenue, spoke in support of staff's recommendation, and stated this is a stable neighborhood, and she prefers it stay zoned single family residential. Tiffany Reynolds, 224 Luce, spoke in support of staff's recommendation not to change the zoning. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: '10:56 p.m. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 February 26, 1997 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to retain the "R-l" zoning on the 25 parcels, as recommended by staff. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. Item NO, 3; R-3 to C-N Chairman Pruden clarified that the property owner had been notified of the proposed rezoning. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 10:57 p.m. Ida Pittman, Willits, part owner of 202 Washington Avenue, stated she is not supportive of the rezoning. Her family has owned the property for the past 30 years, and during the past 14 years, she and her husband have made considerable improvements. They plan to continue to use it as a residential rental. Should they wish to sell the property to a person who would like to use it as a residence, that person may have difficulty obtaining conventional financing if it is rezoned. Since it is a small lot, it is not a large enough parcel for a commercial developer, and too costly for a private developer to do much with on a commercial basis. She feels the rezoning would devalue the property which they have attempted to improve in value. With the exception of the Brookside Retirement Home, the property surrounding this parcel is residential. The neighborhood is family- oriented, and it is the neighbors' desire to keep it that way. Pat Stefani, 225 Washington Avenue, read the letter she had presented to the Planning staff on February 2, 1997 from several realtors and property owners, stating they were opposed to the rezoning of this parcel. She requested the Commission not impact the property owners and neighborhood with another commercial lot. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 11:01 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Puser, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to retain the "R-3" zoning on the parcel located at 202 Washington Street. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. Item No, 2:R-2 to R-3 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 1'1:03 p.m. No one came forward. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 15 February 26, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 11:04 p.m. ON A MOTION by Commission Chiles, seconded by Commissioner Correll, it was carried by the following roll call vote, to rezone the 19 parcels from "R-2" to "R ~" ..-_, as recommended by staff. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Commissioners Larson, Chiles, Puser, Correll, and Chairman Pruden. None. None. None. Mr. Stump advised that all of the rezoning items will go before the City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting of March 19, 1997. Se 8A. 8B. 8C. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORTS City Council and Redevelopment Agency Actions Future Planning Commission Agenda Items Status Reports See Planning Director's Memorandum of February 20, 1997. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS Chairman Pruden rescinded her correction of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 1997. It was the consensus of the Commission to accept her action. 9A. Discussion of the Liu Property - 840 South Oak, Ukiah Discussion followed relative to the Liu property at 840 South Oak, wherein it was determined there would be resolution regarding all issues on this property in the near future. It was noted that the permit was approved for a duplex, but that the actual use has changed from a family-type duplex facility to a care facility. Staff clarified that unless care is being given to more than 6 persons, no permit is required. The bedrooms are occupied, but under individual leases, so technically it cannot be called a care home. Staff further noted the owner is not in violation of state programs, and they cannot find any section of the zoning code which would preclude the owner of the building from doing what she is doing; there is nothing in the code that prohibits a certain number of people from living on a parcel. Staff has notified the owner she must submit a clear parking plan within the next three weeks. There are no landscaping requirements. It was the consensus of the Commission that they will willingly work with Planning staff to clear up this type of issue, and expressed their shock that something like this could occur. Commissioner Chiles inquired regarding business cards for the Commissioners for the purpose of identifying themselves during site visits. He was informed by staff the item could possibly be included in budgeting for the new fiscal year. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 16 February 26, 1997 Chairman Pruden repoded the Demolition Permit Review Committee approval of the demolition of properties on 577 Clara Avenue and 510 South Dora Street. Neither one of the properties was found to be historically significant. 10. ,A,,DJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:28 p.m. · Charles Stump, Senior Planner Marge Giuntoli, Recording Secretary b:meg\win\pc022697.min MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 17 February 26, 1997 7 A Division of Foodmaker, Inc. Restaurant Development 901 Sunrise Avenue, #B-9 Roseville, CA 95661 916-784-7746 FAX: 916-784-1386 ECE iVED Honorable Mayor Sheridan Malone and Members of the Ukiah City Council c/o Mr. Robert Sawyer, Planning Director, City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 MflRIO CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT Planned Development Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02 and Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 Dear Mayor Sheridan and Council Members: Pursuant to the input provided by the City of Ukiah Planning Commission, Foodmaker, Inc., dba Jack in the Box Restaurants, in conjunction with PMB Development Company (applicant) desires to amend the above-referenced application as follows: Reduce the proposed restaurant from a 2,637 square foot 90 seat facility to a 2,377 square foot 54 seat facility. Sixteen permanent outside seats under umbrella with additional landscaping will be placed behind the southern elevation of the building. · The building color will be changed from white to an off-white shade consistent with the balance of the development. · The freeway visible sign will be reduced from 30' to 24' to be consistent with the City of Ukiah sign ordinance. A revised site plan reflecting these changes will be forwarded to you by RHL Design Group (Robert H. Lee & Associates) for your review and comment. The Planning Commission, while not supporting the application, did provide specific input regarding the activity and design of the development. By reducing the overall square footage and seating of the facility, traffic circulation and available parking are improved. The outside seating element is consistent with the Planning Commission's request for outside dining facilities. The change of building color is also consistent with the request of the Planning Commission. The applicant is aware that freeway visible pylon signage is not supported within the Airport Industrial Park development. All other retailers within this development have unobstructed signage visibility from the freeway on their respective buildings. The applicant's location within the development has visual barriers from both the freeway overpass and adjacent Wal-Mart building. It is to the benefit of the City of Ukiah and the applicant to have the ability to capture freeway-oriented traffic desiring the services of Shell Oil Company or Jack in the Box Restaurants as both retailers have limited facilities on the Highway 101 corridor north of Santa Rosa. It is the intent of the applicant to continue to work with the City to successfully complete this project. Any additional questions or comments you may have would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, ~/I~ TItE BOX C~hu~Bghaw Real ~Estate Manager (707) 762-6657 FAX (707) 762-0538 REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENTS 765 Baywood Dr., Suite 339 Petaluma, CA 94954 March 10, 1997 Honorable Mayor Sheridan Malone and Members of the Ukiah City Council c/o Mr. Robert Sawyer Planning Director, City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Planned Development Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02 and Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 Dear Mr. Sawyer: PMB Development Company has been involved in this project since the Fall of 1994 and with the input from City Staff believes the proposed project has resulted in a state of the art Joint Development with two quality national tenants, Shell Oil and Jack in The Box Restaurant. Shell Oil and Jack In The Box Restaurant have found that joint developments provide synergy and work well together for their customers, and these types of co-uses are common at this type of retail/freeway locations. For the past three years we have tried to get a "sit-down" restaurant as part of the development but the demographics and the site do not work for them and despite our efforts in that regard, the site was consistently declined by sit-down restaurants. The other alternative is to develop the Jack In The Box parcel with users who want to locate at this site, such as tire stores and auto part stores, which are allowed by right without even the need for a use permit and easier for the developer to proceed. We felt however, and staff agrees, that our proposed development presents a much higher quality project and is more appropriate and aesthetic to this high profile location. We also felt that a drive-thru restaurant would be preferable in that it would provide an eating opportunity for the business park users and employees, thereby diminishing traffic outside the park. The Planning Commission on February 26, 1997 provided further suggestions to this project which we have addressed with staff and incorporated, and agreed to as follows: Reduced density on the site · Jack In The Box building size reduction · Jack In The Box color modification · Provide outdoor seating · Improve on-site circulation · Tie pedestrian walkways to adjacent WalMart Center · Enhance landscaping March 10, 1997 Page Two These modifications have resulted in an improved development which will allow Shell Oil and Jack In The Box Restaurant to provide services for travelers on U.S. 101, shoppers from the adjacent retail stores and local residents. Neither Shell Oil nor Jack In The Box Restaurants currently serve the community of Ukiah and these retailers have determined this to be the best site for their facilities and would not spend the capital for the development if they did not think it was functional and successful. It is anticipated that this joint development will create approximately 35 local jobs and generate $4.5 million in annual sales. After working on the property for three years and investing time and effort along with the City of Ukiah staff, we feel that this is an opportunity for the City of Ukiah to bring in quality national tenants at the best possible location for their uses, compatible with the adjacent retail and U.S. 101 freeway. We look forward to working with the City of Ukiah to the successful completion of this project and if you need anything further at this time please call me directly. Sincerely, Peter M. Bueklin GOLDEN GATE PETROLEUM CORPORATE OFFICE 1001 GALAXY WAY, SUITE 308 CONCORD. CA 94520 TEL 510-603 8670, FAX 510 687 4587 March 12, 1997 Honorable Mayor Sheridan Malone and Members of the Ukiah City Council cio Mr. Robed Sawyer Planning Director, City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Planned Site Development Permit Application No. 97-03 Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members: Bay Area/Diablo Petroleum Co., dba Golden Gate Petroleum in joint venture with Shell Oil Company has entered into a development with Jack In The Box Restaurants to develop a service station/restaurant on the above referenced project. We believe our development would be of great benefit to the Ukiah community for the following reasons: There currently are no Shell stations or Jack In The Box Restaurants on this highway 101 corridor and we believe this would be an appropriate joint development for this highway/retail location. This type of joint development with complimentary architecture and reciprocal ingress and egress and reciprocal parking rights works well together as opposed to two separate developments. · This facility would draw more customers off of the highway 101 corridor into the City of Ukiah providing an additional $4.5 million in annual local sales. · Local employment will exceed 60 people (15 Shell, 50+ Jack In The Box). The site provides excellent parking and circulation. However, we are willing to re-orient pump layout and reverse traffic direction to entrance of car wash if necessary. · "Fast Pay" pumps (card readers in pumps) and state-of-the-ad "vapor-vac" dispensers (10gal/min) will greatly speed up the fueling process. dokO0$4 Page 2 Golden Gate Petroleum, a supplier to the Ukiah area for over 50 years, looks forward to working with the City of Ukiah on this project and if you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to call me at (510) 603-8670. Sincerely, Dennis M. O'Keefe President RECEIVED CITY OF PETITION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH Re: Approval of Jack In The Box CITY or UKiAN We, the undersigned, ask that the City Council of U~~ 1997 overturn the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny PBM Development's request to develop a JACK IN THE BOX at the corner of Talmage and Airport Blvd. We ask that the City Council approve the development of JACK IN THE BOX based on the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the general plan and zoning of the subject property; and 2. Drive through services are already in the Airport Industrial Park area (i.e. (1) Friedman Bros. drive through for lumber, et seq. (2) Walmart drive through "lube express"); and 3. UKIAH NEEDS A "JACK IN THE BOX"!! NAME ADDRESS /¢/vc :/ /</, "' '' L- '7% '/ ' PT'''~ - ' 7 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 18, 1997 TO: Candace Horsley, City Manager FROM- Bob Sawyer, City Planning Director SUBJECT: Air Quality Management District Comments for Ordinance Amendment No. 97-02 I would like to request that the attached letter be forwarded to the City Council prior to its meeting on Wednesday, March 18, 1997. This letter details the Mendocino Air Quality Management District's comments on the proposed amendment (#OA 97-02) to the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance that is scheduled for City Council action at this meeting. The District's response letter was submitted to Associate Planner Dave Lohse, who reviewed it as part of the Planning Department's analysis for the proposed ordinance amendment and Site Development Permit application (#97-03). Mr. Lohse contacted Mr. Allen upon receipt of the letter and expressed concern that the District's conclusion that drive-thru restaurants cause "substantially higher motor vehicles emissions" was not properly substantiated or part of a comprehensive analysis of the air quality impacts caused by the drive-thru restaurant. Mr. Allen responded that the District's conclusions had been drawn from a recent study that concluded that such impacts would result from drive-thru uses. Mr. Lohse recommended that this study and other relevant information be included as part of the District comments if these comments were to be included as part of the Planning Department's analysis. Mr. Lohse also noted in this conversation that the District's recommendation for the denial of this project should be directly linked to specific or cumulative air quality impacts caused by the development of this drive-thru restaurant, or that it should reflect a District policy to oppose all future land uses in the Ukiah air basin that include a drive-thru component. Mr. Allen noted that project-specific information was not available, and that the District did not oppose drive-thru uses, in general. Based on this conversation, Mr. Lohse suggested to Mr. Allen that the Planning Department could probably not support the conclusions or recommendations advanced by District staff. He also recommended that additional information either be submitted to the Planning Department or that District staff plan to be present at the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for these projects. Mr. Allen could not confirm that District staff would be present to support their conclusions or recommendations. Based on this response, Mr. Lohse understood that the comments included in the District's letter were not to be included in the project analysis or presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission did, however, request that this letter be included in its review of the ordinance amendment, which was held on February 26 of this year. Planning staff presented a copy of the District's comments and explained its reasons for not including it as part of the Planning Report for the project. The contents of the letter were then discussed by the Planning Commission. This discussion is summarized on Page 7 of the Minutes for the February 26, 1997, Planning Commission meeting, which are attached to the Agenda Summary received by the Council last week. In subsequent conversations with Mr. Allen, Planning Department staff have established that the District did intend that the letter be presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council during the hearings for the proposed ordinance amendment and Site Development Permit. Therefore, the Planning Department requests that the District's comments be forwarded to the Council. It should also be noted that the Planning Department has already begun attaching a listing of agency comments in each Planning Report, including copies of al_l written comments submitted during the project review process. It is anticipated that the inclusion of such comments will eliminate miscommunications between City staff and commenting agencies and ensure that all pertinent comments are included as part of the project analysis. DAVID FAULKNER Air Pollution Control Officer PHILIP W. TOWLE Air Quality Specialist January 22, 1996 COUNTY OF MENDOClNO AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 306 East Gobbl Street Uklah, California (707) 463-4354 Fax: (707) 463-5707 Mr. Dave Lohse Planning Department City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 SUBJECT: Comments re: Planned Development Ordinance Amendment #97-02; Site Development Permit Application # 97-03; and Tentative Minor Subdivision Map # & 97-04 Dear Mr. Lohse: We have reviewed the project proposal by Robert H. Lee for a fast food restaurant with a drive-thru window, an auto service station, a convenience store and a car wash. The District opposes the proposed ordinance amendment which would allow drive-thru restaurants in the Airport Industrial Park. We understand that drive-thru restaurants create substantially higher motor vehicle emissions than non-drive-thru restaurants. The Ukiah Valley already experiences high ozone concentrations during the summer months, when the ozone measurements exceed 80 parts per billion, dangerously close to the state standard of 90 parts per billion. Attached is a chart which shows ozone measurements over the past four years. It is essential reduce motor vehicle emissions Whenever possible, in order to keep the project below the CEQA thresholds and the avoid exceeding state standards. The District regularly measures exceedance of the California PM-10 standard in Ukiah. The project mitigation measures should include all the measures listed in the attachment "Possible Mitigation Measures for Development Projects; "Mitigations to reduce construction-related impacts on air quality." Mr. David Lohse 1/22/97 page 2 · Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions please contact me at 463-4354. Sincerely, Walt Allen Air Quality Planner Attachments wa:c:/planning/ccqa/ukiah/projrev/airprt I Mendocino County Air Quality Management District August, 1996 page 1 POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS A. 3. Mitigations to reduce construction-related impacts on air quality: Use low emission mobile construction equipment (e.g., tractor, scraper, dozer, etc.). Water site and clean equipment morning and evening. Spread soil binders on site, unpaved roads, and parking areas. Apply approved chemical soil-stabilizers according to manufacturers specifications, to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas which remain inactive for 96 hours). Reestablish ground cover on construction site through seeding and watering. Employ construction activity management techniques, such as: extending construction period; reducing the number of pieces used simultaneously; increasing the distance between emission sources; reducing or changing the hours of construction; and scheduling activity during off-peak hours. Pave construction roads and sweep streets if silt is carded over to adjacent public thoroughfares. Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved road surfaces to 15 miles per hour or less. Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. Wash off trucks leaving the site. Maintain construction equipment engines by keeping them tuned. Use low sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment.. Utilize existing power Sources (e.g., power poles) or clean fuel generators rather than temporary power generators. Use low emission on-site stationary equipment. z Pads Per Billion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C: dba ~ple '~' Tire Centem 5180 Commerce Blvd., Rohnert Park, California 94928 (707) 586-1266 (707) 586-0326 Fax March 1~, 1996 Dear City Of Ukiah, We agra~ with that expansion as r~comenQed to the City across from ~Jal-:4art. That expansion will create more traffic and is in k~eping with making that ar83. a ~uainess hub. L.N. 5ombard ?riple S Tires Owner