Day 1999.02.02PC

Commissioner Williams requested that City Attorney Lamoree’ s comment during the nuisance ordinance regarding existing conditions should read “ …existing, permanent facilities…” . Commissioner Williams moved, Commissioner Dimmick seconded to approve the minutes of January 19, 1999, as amended. Motion approved 7-0.

Associate Planner Trippi reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this is a proposal to develop a 117-unit senior apartment complex on 5.2 acres located at the southeast corner of Marshall Road and Alamo Drive. The complex will include one and two story apartments and a recreational building for residents. On-site parking will include 117 covered and 14 uncovered spaces. The project site is proposed to be fenced and gated. Primary project access would be from Alamo Drive, with a secondary access point on Marshall Road.

Vice-Chairman Minkler noted that Condition #20 had been repeated. Regarding Condition #32, he asked for clarification regarding maintenance of the backflow prevention device and if the sewer and water were public. Staff noted that the backflow device would be privately maintained but the sewer and water would be maintained by the City.

Commissioner Williams also questioned Condition #32 and asked who would determine if two points of connection would be required. Staff noted that the City Engineer would make that determination.

Commissioner Drake noted that there are two existing palm trees on the site and questioned if they would be removed. Staff clarified that they would be removed as part of this project.

Commissioner Aldrich asked if the conditions included age restrictions and if this would be a low income project. Mr. Trippi noted that condition #4 addresses the age restriction, and added that it would not be low-income housing.

Vice-Chairman Minkler moved, Commissioner Drake seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 98-247 recommending to the City Council approval of the Walnut Grove Senior Apartments Mitigated Negative Declaration, Planned Development, Rezoning, and Policy Plan Amendment. Motion approved 7-0.

Associate Planner Trippi reviewed the project and introduced the staff report into the record, noting that this is 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. Consideration of this item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 19, 1999.

Commissioner Williams questioned why this project could be considered for a categorical exemption from CEQA because it will have visual impacts on the community. He noted that he is concerned about the visual size of the structure and the close proximity to other uses.

Carl Chenault, Vice President of Ford Mercury, noted that they have been working on this project for almost two years. He stated that the intent of the sign would be to increase the viability of the business, adding that they are a smaller dealership and have a harder time competing with larger dealership advertising. He felt that a freeway sign would help people find their location. He noted that the height of 80 ft. was established by conducting various drive-by tests at various heights, and it was determined that a lower height would not allow effective visibility. He noted that it would be considerably less expensive to construct a freeway sign than to construct a new facility at a different site. He stated that this dealership has been established at this location for many years and they wish to remain there.

Commissioner Turpen commented that it may not be critical that the sign be visible from both directions on the freeway because chances are if a car is traveling in one direction, it will also travel in the opposite direction at some point. He noted that if the sign height were reduced, the lower panels may not be visible. He felt that in the future, it might be important to encourage co-locating on signs to reduce the number of signs that are constructed. He also felt that it would be beneficial to eliminate billboards along the freeway.

Commissioner Aldrich stated that she has received complaints about the Brendan Theater sign, and that they will be reviewing the sign ordinance in the near future. She felt that they should not grant exceptions to the sign ordinance before the new sign ordinance is adopted. She added that she does not consider this a freeway-oriented business, and that the Commission may be setting a precedent by approving the variance. She felt that 80 feet is excessive, but 60 feet would be acceptable.

Commissioner Williams noted concern with the 80 foot height, adding that he has driven past the site, and from the west, a sign would be visible at 47 feet. He noted that people in Vacaville know where the Ford dealership is located and he does not consider this a freeway-oriented business. He felt that they would be setting a precedent for other businesses. He noted that the proposed sign is 8 feet higher than the factory stores sign. He felt that having such a tall structure would not be in proportion with the surrounding area. In addition, they could not meet the criteria for a variance, because the sign is inconsistent with the General Plan regarding visual impacts. He stated that it would be premature to grant a variance prior to the sign ordinance being adopted. He felt that the existing signs on the site are adequate for the business, adding that he would support a 60 foot sign.

Commissioner Dimmick commented that the size of the sign is out of place for the surrounding area and that 60 feet would be reasonable. He questioned how long the dealership would remain at this location, and what the long term status of the sign would be if the business closed. Mr. Trippi noted that there could be a condition of approval, that if the business relocated or closed, they would have to remove the sign, but it could be difficult if there are other users on the sign.

Commissioner Turpen suggested that review of the sign be brought back after the adjoining billboard is removed so the sign proportion could be better depicted. Mr. Rowland noted that the billboard is a legal non-conforming sign and the City does not have the authority to take it down.

Chairman Wilkins felt that a 60 foot sign would be reasonable. He noted that there are four Ford dealerships within the surrounding area, and three of them are close to the freeway. He felt that it is important to allow visible signage from the freeway and the potential to attract people to shopping centers and revitalize the area.

Commissioner Williams moved, Commissioner Aldrich seconded that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 98-248 denying the requested variance for the Vacaville Ford-Mercury freeway sign. Motion approved 7-0.

Commissioner Williams questioned whether conditions could be applied since a 60 foot sign could be approved by the Planning Director. Mr. Rowland noted that there needs to be consistency, and that no conditions have been required of other 60 foot signs. Mr. Williams noted that signs should be reviewed on their own merits, with the intent to improve the visual aesthetics of the community.

1. City Planner Emerson reviewed the purpose of the apartment vacancy rate and rent survey and the method of conducting the survey. He explained that the survey results indicate that the vacancy rate as of October 1, 1998, was 2.2 percent and that rental rates have increased. For the purposes of the City Ordinance, a severe housing shortage is deemed to exist and that no new applications for the conversion of apartments to ownership housing would be accepted.

Housing & Redevelopment Manager Johnston noted that 262 units that are currently off the market for rehab were not included in the survey.

Chairman Wilkins questioned if there has been a problem with being able to provide housing. Mr. Emerson noted that rents are going up which is probably a reflection of lower vacancy rates. He noted the recently approved projects and apartments under construction that should improve the rental supply in the community.

Commissioner Williams questioned if there is a way to determine the number of homes that are rental units.

Ms. Johnston noted that property owners often rent the home themselves, rather than using a management company, so it is hard to track the number of rental units there are in Vacaville. She stated that there could be some information provided in the census.

Chairman Wilkins recommended contacting other cities to see if they have this information and how they conduct the survey. He noted that the information in the vacancy service could be misleading if they don’ t have that information.

Commissioner Drake questioned if there is any information on the quality of units and why some have waiting lists and others don’ t.

Mr. Emerson clarified for the Commission that there has not been a request for a condo conversion for many years.

Commissioner Williams also stated that through his contacts in the building industry, builders are often reluctant to do condo conversions, because they can’ t guarantee the quality of work when the units were originally constructed.

Commissioner Turpen noted his appreciation for the information that was received, adding that it is important to have a supply of affordable housing. He added that it is also important to stay aware of trends and offer a variety of entry level housing.

2. 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.

3. Assistant Director Rowland reported on the study session that was held by the City Council regarding the strategic plan. He reviewed the plan and the meetings that will be held in the future, adding that the Council wants to receive input from other organizations within the community. Mr. Rowland noted that the role of the Commission would be to provide input and some of the members may serve on a committee. It was the consensus of the Commission that they could review and discuss the strategic plan at a regular meeting.

4. Assistant Director Rowland informed the Commission that their review of the sign ordinance is tentatively scheduled for March 16. Vice-Chairman Minkler commented that they should proceed with the intent that the provisions of the new ordinance will be enforced. Commissioner Williams suggested looking at other ways to calculate the allowed signage other than linear footage.

5. City Planner Emerson reviewed a proposal for a detention basin at the end of Butcher Road and questioned if the Commission wanted to review the project. It was the consensus of the Commission that it could be reviewed by staff. Commissioner Williams requested that the basin be constructed and maintained in a natural state, to blend with the surrounding open space.

Commissioner Drake noted that he had received complaints about how people are disruptive in the lobby of the Council Chambers while Commission meetings are still in session. He added that if people are talking in the lobby, it makes it difficult for people in the audience to hear the proceedings of the meeting. Mr. Drake also noted that he has been undergoing radiation for prostate cancer and has been confirmed clean. The Commission congratulated Mr. Drake on his recovery.

Commissioner Aldrich stated that she had noticed homeless families along Nut Tree Road on the weekends and questioned if they can be referred to someone, and if there is an ordinance that addresses this. Staff noted that they would look into the situation.

Commissioner Turpen noted his appreciation for the continuance of the Old Rocky Subdivision. He felt that SB 50 will be challenged by CEQA from cities that have more justification than Vacaville. He noted his agreement with staff using maximal discretion regarding annexations. He felt that it is still important to have a response to SB 50, and that maximum disclosure to homebuyers is important. He also recommended pausing to recalculate the impact on services and how they are paid for.

Commissioner Williams commended Mr. Trippi for his presentation on the Ford sign, and for the time and effort he took to work with the applicant.

Mr. Rowland reviewed the lengthy process that the Ford sign proposal went through, adding that he knew it would be a difficult decision for the Commission.

Mr. Rowland noted that four of the Commissioners are up for reappointment and that the Mayor would be in contact with them.

Chairman Wilkins stated that he had met with the Mayor and expressed his appreciation for the Commission’ s excellent rapport and their ability to work well with staff. He also noted his appreciation for staff’ s hard work and professionalism.

There being no further business to discuss at this regular meeting of the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.