Month 1999.01 January.


Day 1999.01.19PC


PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
City of Vacaville
7:30 -p.m. –  Council Chambers    January 19, 1999

CALL TO ORDER:
The regular meeting of the Vacaville Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Wilkins at 7:30 p.m.

A.    ROLL CALL:
Present:    Chairman Wilkins, Vice-Chairman Minkler, Commissioner Aldrich, Commissioner Dimmick, Commissioner Drake, Commissioner Turpen, Commissioner Williams.
Also Present:    Assistant Community Development Director Rowland, City Planner Emerson, Associate Planner Trippi, Assistant Planner Behvand, City Engineer Baird, City Attorney Lamoree, Housing & Redevelopment Manager Johnston.

C.    COMMUNICATIONS:
1.    Letter in support of Item G.3, Freeway Signs.
2.    Two letters of concern regarding Item H.1, Atencio Day Care.

D.    APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
    Commissioner Drake moved, Vice-Chairman Minkler seconded to approve the agenda and continue item G.4, Vacaville Ford/Mercury Freeway Sign to February 2, 1999.  Motion approved 7-0.

E.    APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
    Vice-Chairman Minkler moved, Commissioner Aldrich seconded to approve the minutes of January 5, 1999.  Motion approved 6-0-1 (Dimmick abstained).

F.    BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:
    None.

G.    PUBLIC HEARINGS:

1.    VACAVILLE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY MASTER PLAN –  RSA Architects, applicant
File No. 98-233
a.    Conditional Use Permit
b.    Reaffirmed Negative Declaration

Associated Planner Trippi reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record noting that this is a proposed master plan for expansion of the Vacaville Christian Academy, located at 1117 Davis Street.  Phase I of the expansion includes 3 buildings with 21,400 sq. ft. of floor area and 10 classrooms, as well as sports fields and an emergency access road connection to the east end of Padan School Road.  Phase II adds 15 high school classrooms and a 1,200 seat multi-purpose room.  Pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration for expansion of the Christian Academy, which adequately described the impacts of this project and meets the requirements of CEQA.

Mr. Trippi reviewed the proposed revisions to Conditions 16 and 18 regarding paving of the access road and installation of a gate.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
    Cathy Mathews, Vacaville Christian Academy, applauded staff for the hard work on this project, adding that they agree with the conditions of approval.  She felt that the project will not only be good for the school, but also the community.  Regarding the access road at the rear of the site, she stated that they maintain strict vehicular traffic control on their property and keep visitors at the front of the site. She stated that they would be willing to post “ no access”  signs on this road, and it would only be used for workers maintaining the playing fields.
    Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
    Vice-Chairman Minkler questioned how the site is marked for traffic control.  Mr. Trippi reviewed the current lane markings and how traffic is directed on the site.
    Commissioner Williams stated that this project will be an asset to Vacaville, noting that they have designed as much on the site as possible to meet all their needs.  He requested that conditions be modified that the access road be paved sooner than Phase 2 if the need arises.
    Commissioner Dimmick questioned if the high school students would be allowed to park on the site.  Ms. Mathews clarified that they are allowed to park by permit only, subject to restrictions imposed by the Principal.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Commissioner Williams moved, Vice-Chairman Minkler seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 98-233 reaffirming the previous negative declaration and approving the conditional use permit for the Vacaville Christian Academy Master Development and Expansion Plan modifying conditions 15, 16 & 18 to read as follows:

15.    The final design and location of the proposed emergency vehicle access drive from the end of Padan School Road is subject to review and approval by the City Planner, City Engineer, and Fire Marshal, prior to the issuance of building permits for Phase 1.  The plans shall include the following:
a.    Connection from Padan School Road to the emergency vehicle access drive.
b.    Gravel surface or equivalent maintained on a regular basis for dust control and capable of supporting the imposed load of emergency vehicles and/or apparatus.
c.    Provisions to prevent parking on unimproved land on the project site or on adjoining properties.
d.    Gates, bollards, or an approved equivalent at the north end of the emergency vehicle access drive (site entrance from Padan School Road) installed as part of Phase 1, and
e.    Gates, bollards or an approved equivalent at the south end of the emergency vehicle drive installed as part of Phase 2.

16.    The emergency vehicle access drive shall be paved with asphalt, or an equivalent surface approved by the Fire Marshal, as part of Phase 2 or with the installation of new underground utility line(s), whichever occurs first.  Paving may be required prior to the construction of Phase 2 or the installation of new underground utility lines if the gravel deteriorates creating dust impacts on adjoining properties or substantiated complaints are received related to dust generation, subject to a determination by the City Planner.

18.    Only emergency vehicle access would be allowed to Padan School Road as part of Phases 1 and 2, except as provided by Condition #19.

Motion approved 7-0.

2.    NUISANCE ORDINANCE UPDATE - City of Vacaville, applicant
    File No. 98-120
a.    Municipal Code Amendment
b.    Draft Negative Declaration

City Planner Emerson reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report into the record noting that it consists of proposed amendments to the Vacaville Municipal Code related to parking of non-operable vehicles in residential districts, maintenance of vacant buildings, storage and accumulation of debris and junk, maintenance of clear public streets and sidewalks, and administrative procedures related to the above items.  An amendment is also proposed to the Land Use and Development Code that permits vehicle parking only on driveways in the front and street side yards within residential zoning districts.  This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 5, 1999.

City Planner Emerson provided examples of plot plans to illustrate front yard paving.

Vice-Chairman Minkler questioned if a driveway were widened, could the paving be extended to the curb, and could the driveway approach be widened.  Staff noted that the City code only allows a driveway approach to accommodate two cars, but paving could be extended to the sidewalk.

Commissioner Williams commended City staff for their work on the ordinance, and questioned if existing conditions will be grandfathered in.  City Attorney Lamoree noted that existing, permanent facilities would be, but the City Council will provide direction of how it will be handled for new construction.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
    Lou Derfuss, Vacaville resident, stated that he lives on California Drive in an area where the street width is restricted, and he is forced to park his RV in front of his home on a grass/stone area.  He stated that he thinks the intent of the ordinance is to avoid junk vehicles, but there needs to be a provision for recreational vehicles.  He noted that many people also have the hobby of car restoration, and if the car is licensed, it should be able to be parked at a residence. Commissioner Wilkins responded that the purpose is not to single out RV’ s, but it is important to not impose on other neighbors.  The intent is to address vehicles parked in front yards.  Mr. Derfuss also stated that he has a large walnut tree in his side yard that restricts him from parking in his sideyard.  Mr. Lamoree stated that they understand that there is not uniformity of lots and that adjustments can be made for individual situations.  Vice-Chairman Minkler stated that he also has an RV, and because it could be an imposition to his neighbors, he chooses to park it at a storage area.  Mr. Derfuss stated that he doesn’ t feel that he is imposing on his neighbors and that he has no neighbors across the street from him.  Commissioner Dimmick noted that a good point was raised that opinions are different, but they have tried to set a community standard that will protect his property values as well as his neighbors.  He felt that compromises often have to be made for the good of the whole community.
Commissioner Aldrich stated that she appreciated Mr. Derfuss's comments, adding that the ordinance is not only for aesthetics, but also to protect the environment.  She felt the intent is to avoid contamination to the soil, which is the purpose of requiring that vehicles be parked on impervious surfaces.
    Commissioner Drake noted that three of the Commissioner’ s have RV’ s and it is their problem, not their neighbors, and it is up to them to provide a solution of where to store them.
    Robert Barnes, Vacaville resident, stated that at least 50% of the community has RV’ s that they park in their yard.  He felt that it is a sign of success, and people have the right to work hard to acquire these items.  He quoted amendments to the constitution, and how taking of a vehicle off someones property because a neighbor doesn’ t want it is against the constitution.  He noted that he has additional paving at the side of his driveway and felt that anyone should be allowed to have concrete that is useful.  Regarding 25% coverage of the backyard, he felt that as long as items are behind the fence and not visible from the street, it is only the business of the property owner.  He stated that if a neighbor has a problem with another neighbor, they should file an appropriate lawsuit and not involve the City.  He noted that renters often couldn’ t pave areas if they don’ t have the property owner’ s permission.  He stated that with inoperable vehicles, people often have to wait to do the repairs and it requires insurance and a smog test to have the car registered and it can be expensive to obtain inoperable tags.  Vice-Chairman Minkler questioned how property values could be affected if everyone had an RV parked in the yard.  Mr. Barnes felt that it would not damage property values, adding that neighbors should work together and a person could obtain an appraisal to prove if his property value is being damaged.  Vice-Chairman Minkler noted that 90% of the laws are required because of 10% of the people, and this is largely the case with this ordinance.  Mr. Barnes stated that he agreed with what the ordinance is trying to accomplish, but felt that a different approach should be taken. Commissioner Turpen noted that the theory of suing someone for damages did not make sense, because you would not incur damage until you sold your home.  Mr. Barnes reiterated his concern that what people keep in their back yard should not be regulated unless it is a safety issue.
    Mr. Lamoree noted why the items Mr. Barnes quoted did not apply to this ordinance. Regarding inoperable vehicles, they need to look like they do operate and not be on blocks or taken apart.
    Charles Thorpe, 543 Muir Court, wanted to make sure that the ordinance still addressed items other than cars.  He stated that he is waiting resolution of this ordinance to assist with problems he is having in his area.
    Lou Derfuss stated that they need to take into consideration changing situations.  He noted that he has teenagers that live at home and have extra vehicles.  He didn’ t want the number of vehicles restricted for developing families and those who can’ t afford to store their RV’ s elsewhere.
    Russ Garrison thanked the Commission for their efforts on the ordinance, but questioned if the ordinance will address boats, and the amount of time trash containers can be kept on the street.  Mr. Lamoree clarified that it will cover boats, and the intent is that trash containers not be kept on the street all week.
    Randy Carter, 619 Isabella Court, stated that, as always, he is adamantly opposed to this ordinance.  He felt that the issues are clearly aesthetic and are not an environmental concern.  He stated that oil and gas from vehicles could still run off concrete and into the drainage system.  He felt that the City Attorney is misleading the public, and that vehicles are the driving force behind this ordinance.  Mr. Lamoree clarified that inoperable and unregistered vehicles are addressed in the ordinance.  He added that he would be willing to provide Mr. Carter with the material that will be given to the City Council for their consideration.  Mr. Carter questioned what will happen to a vehicle that is not fixed within the required time frame.  He felt that peoples’  rights should not be taken away, and if it is not a safety issue, no one should be concerned.  He stated that houses in his area have not lost property value.  Vice-Chairman Minkler stated that real estate experts could verify how property values could be affected by how adjoining properties are maintained.
    Commissioner Turpen questioned the wording for the rear yard area.  Mr. Lamoree clarified that coverage and height limitations will be addressed, adding that he would clarify the wording for that section.  He noted that legal sheds would not be calculated into the coverage.
    Commissioner Williams commented that in Section 8.10.030(A)(9), the word “ and”  could be replaced with “ or”  to better clarify the wording.
    Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
    Commissioner Williams reviewed the review process for this ordinance for the benefit of the people in the audience who may not be aware of previous discussions on this issue. He stated that the Commission’ s intent is to ensure a quality of life for the community as a whole, adding that they have tried to listen to all the public input.  He applauded the City Attorney and City staff for their work on the ordinance.
    Commissioner Turpen questioned if there are other ordinances that address the distance an RV can be parked from the street.  Mr. Lamoree referred to the section of the vehicle code that addresses safety issues.  Regarding the issue of oil and other liquids, he stated that they don’ t want people to put substances in the drainage system, but it would be better in the drainage system where it could go through the treatment process, than being absorbed in the ground water.
    Commissioner Drake noted the countless hours and hard work by staff on this ordinance.  He felt that the opposition to the ordinance is perceived erosion of rights, adding that it is important to not abuse the rights we have.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Commissioner Dimmick moved, Vice-Chairman Minkler seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 98-120 recommending approval to the City Council of the amendments to the Public Nuisance, Abandoned Vehicle and Land Use and Development Codes and the draft Negative Declaration.  Motion approved 7-0.

3.    FREEWAY SIGNS FOR SHOPPING CENTERS –  City of Vacaville, applicant
    File No. 99-003
a.    Land Use and Development Code Amendment
b.    Draft Negative Declaration

Assistant Director Rowland reviewed the proposal and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that the proposal would allow freeway-oriented ground signs for shopping centers located near freeways.  Such signs would be allowed only for shopping centers that are not within a policy plan, that have 3 or more activities, that have a minimum floor area of 80,000 sq. ft., and that have a minimum site area of greater than one-half acre and are located within 300’  of a freeway right-of-way.

Mr. Rowland stated that we do have an indication that the size of a sign and content could attract more tenants and customers to a center, adding that the signs would be limited to three tenants.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
    Mark Angstrom, Nugget Markets, stated that they are working to occupy the K-Mart site, and are concerned that they be allowed a freeway sign.  He added that they will be sub-leasing a portion of the building and a freeway sign would be a key element to a co-anchor.  He noted that they have reviewed the proposed sign regulations and are in support of the proposal.  He stated that they anticipate being open by Thanksgiving of next year.
    Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
    Commissioner Aldrich asked for clarification of where a sign at the K-Mart site could be located.  Mr. Rowland noted that a sign could be located along E. Monte Vista, which would be within 300 feet of the freeway.
    Vice-Chairman Minkler stated that this is a great idea that could add vitality to the property and attract new tenants.
    Chairman Wilkins noted that many vacant centers have become an eyesore because they aren’ t being utilized.  He hoped that the proposed signs will add to the vitality of the centers and help the merchants in town.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Commissioner Williams moved, Commissioner Aldrich seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 99-003, recommending that the City Council approve the Sign Ordinance Amendment.  Motion approved 7-0.

4.    VACAVILLE FORD/MERCURY FREEWAY SIGN –  Superior Signs, applicant
    File No. 98-248
a.    Variance
A request to allow a freeway-oriented sign for Vacaville Ford/Mercury, located at the southwest corner of Peabody Road and Cliffside Drive.  The height of the proposed sign is eighty feet.  This is twenty feet taller than allowed by Ordinance.  This item was continued to the Planning Commission meeting of February 2, 1999.

H.    BUSINESS ITEM:

1.    ATENCIO DAY CARE HOME –  Donna Atencio, applicant
    File No. 98-207
a.    Large Family Day Care Home

Assistant Planner Behvand reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this is a referral of a Large Family Day Care Home permit (7 to 14 children) for consideration by the Planning Commission.  The proposed day care home is located at 317 Plum Street.  The application has been referred to the Commission because of concerns expressed from area residents who received the initial public notice.

Commissioner Williams questioned the noise analysis and why a wooden fence would mitigate noise.  He also noted that the applicants had indicated that they typically do not use the back yard for playtime, but there is nothing to preclude them from doing so in the future.  Mr. Behvand noted that the applicant has operated a small day care at this location for the past 8 months and have not received any complaints.  He clarified that they currently have a chain link fence with slats, and it was felt that a wood fence could help buffer the noise if complaints are received in the future.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED:
Moses Atencio, representing his wife, clarified hours of operation of the day care.  He noted that they only operate in the morning with children who attend kindergarten in the afternoon and that they do not intend to expand their hours of operation.  He stated that they are responsible citizens and will take into consideration the rights of others and accommodate their neighbors concerns.  He clarified that the fence is chain link with slats, and didn’ t think that a wood fence would buffer more noise.  He stated that the chain link is easier to maintain, and it would be a financial burden for them to install a wood fence.  He noted that the children are supervised at all times while they are outside, and they typically utilize the park or library rather that the backyard for playtime.
    Public hearing closed.

COMMISSION COMMENTS:
    Commissioner Williams noted that he and his wife both work and have utilized childcare so he understands the importance of this type of use.  He noted his concern with the potential noise with the increase in the number of children.  He suggested that a condition be added to address noise mitigation measures rather than wood fencing.
    Commissioner Turpen felt that conditions 3 & 4 are impractical and should only regulate the conditions within the hours of operation.  He felt that the letter they received serves as a noise complaint.
    Commissioner Drake felt that the applicants are responsible people who have operated for a number of months without complaint.  He felt that the City will know if they are not operating correctly, and the applicant is aware of that possibility.

COMMISSION ACTION:

Commissioner Dimmick moved, Vice-Chairman Minkler seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 98-207 approving the Atencio Large Family Day Care permit subject to the conditions of approval, eliminating Conditions 3 & 4 and modifying Condition 8 to read as follows:

8.    Comply with the City of Vacaville Noise Ordinance during the hours of operation.  If complaints are received regarding violations of the Noise Ordinance, and if these complaints are substantiated by the City, the City may require additional noise mitigation measures.

Motion approved 7-0.


I.    DIRECTOR'S REPORT:

1.    Assistant Director Rowland reported on City Council actions pertaining to Planning Commission items and reviewed the tentative schedule of future Planning Commission items and select items under staff review.

2.    Assistant Director Rowland noted that a preliminary draft of the Sign Ordinance would be discussed at a meeting to be held January 25, 1999.

3.    Assistant Director Rowland informed the Commission of  a neighborhood meeting to be held on January 20, 1999 to discuss Vinyard Hills.  He also noted the Special Planning Commission meeting on January 27, 1999 to discuss school impacts, adding that a packet of information would be provided for the Commission prior to the meeting.

5.    Assistant Director Rowland noted that the City Council would be holding a special meeting on February 2, 1999 to discuss the Strategic Plan.


J.    COMMISSION COMMENTS:

Commissioner Aldrich thanked Mr. Emerson for his work on the issue of lighting behind her house, noting that they had met with the contractor to resolve the issue.

Commissioner Williams stated that he had attended a state sponsored conference on Proposition 1A, along with Associate Planner McDowell, and Assistant City Attorney Hobrecht, adding that it provided good information and answered a lot of questions.  He noted that the three key points of the conference were 1) No changes will be made to the new law in the next year, because the legislators want to give it a chance to work; 2) Recognition that this does preclude denial of a project because of school impacts; 3) Mitigation fees/costs should be shared by state and local agencies.  Mr. Williams noted that there are options available to the City and offered to meet with Mr. Rowland and Mr. Lamoree so that they could receive his input before the special meeting on the 27th.

Commissioner Drake stated that they have labored for many months regarding the nuisance ordinance and is proud of the action that was taken.


K.    ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business to discuss at this regular meeting of the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Mary Page, Recording Secretary