PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. CITY OF CERES, CALIFORNIA City Council Chambers, 2701 Fourth Street

Transcription

1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CERES, CALIFORNIA City Council Chambers, 2701 Fourth Street Monday, December 3, :00 p.m. Mailing Address: Planning Division, 2220 Magnolia Street, Ceres, CA Phone: (209) Fax: (209) In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Public Works Director, (209) Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. (28 CFR ADA Title II) Members of the public are advised that all pagers, cellular telephones and any other communication devices are to be turned off upon entering the City Council Chambers. CALL TO ORDER by Chairperson Smith PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE to the flag led by Chairperson Smith ROLL CALL Commissioners Condit, Del Nero, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS to the Commission on matters not included on the agenda (5 minutes). While the Planning Commission welcomes and encourages participation in Planning Commission meetings, adopted rules allow no more than 5 minutes (Resolution No ) for expression of non-agenda items. Matters under the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, and not on the posted agenda, may be addressed by the general public; however, California law prohibits the Planning Commission from taking action on any matter which is not on the posted agenda unless it is determined to be an emergency by the Planning Commission. Citizens are entitled to address the Planning Commission on any agenda item subject to the 5 minute provision. 1

2 CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed on the consent calendar are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required, that particular item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered separately. 1. Clerk s Report of Posting. The Agenda for the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of December 3, 2018 was posted on November 27, Approval of Minutes a. October 15, 2018 (Del Nero absent) b. October 29, Special Meeting (all present) CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARING(S) Public Hearings are generally required by regulation, where public comments go into the public record and the hearing is governed by rules concerning who speaks when and for how long and is overseen by a hearing official. 3. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Time Extension; Proposal for a one (1) year time extension for a previously approved project associated with the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility. Gary Rodgers, applicant. CEQA STATUS: Exempt per Section 15332, Class 32 - Infill Development Projects REQUIRED ACTION: Approve PC Resolution NEW BUSINESS 4. Review General Plan 2035 Implementation Task List for the Timeframe of PUBLIC MEETING(S) Public Meetings are generally not required by regulation, involve an open, informal discussion between interested parties run by a moderator where comments may or may not be placed in the public record. None UNFINISHED BUSINESS None MATTERS INITIATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF None 2

3 REPORTS Commission Chairperson City Attorney City Staff ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be held on Tuesday, January 22, ANY DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN BE APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL Such an appeal of a Planning Commission action from this meeting must be filed by 5:00 p.m., December 13, Any person who challenges any of the following actions in court, may be limited to raising only those issues that they or someone else raised at the Public Hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Ceres at, or prior to, the Public Hearing. The appeal must be filed in writing with a $ filing fee. I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\Agenda\2018\ doc. 3

4 PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CERES, CALIFORNIA Welcome to this meeting of the Ceres Planning Commission. Your interest in the affairs of Ceres is gratifying. The City of Ceres was incorporated February 25, 1918, and is a General Law City in the County of Stanislaus of the State of California. The purposes of the Planning Commission meeting are to make decisions on various permit applications and to make recommendations to the City Council on matters concerning land use and future development. The Planning Commission follows a regular order of business during its meeting. The agenda is prepared in advance by the Planning Division of the City Manager s Office. Copies of the agenda are available at the counter of the Planning Division from Friday morning through 5:00 p.m., Monday. After 5:00 p.m., copies may be obtained in the Council Chambers at the Planning Commission Meeting. If you have a matter to bring before the Planning Commission which is not listed on the agenda, you may be heard under CITIZEN COMMUNICATION. Please step forward to the podium and give your name and address before speaking to the Commission Planning Commission 8 9 PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Commissioner David Johnson 2. Commissioner Gary Del Nero 3. Commissioner Robert Kachel 4. Chairperson Laurie Smith 5. Vice Chairperson Couper Condit 6. City Attorney STAFF 8. City Manager Toby Wells 9. Director of Community Development Tom Westbrook 10. Senior Planner James Michaels 11. Administrative Secretary Ann Montgomery Regular public meetings of other city government bodies are scheduled as follows: CITY COUNCIL Second and Fourth Mondays at 6:00 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION First and Third Mondays at 6:00 p.m. I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\agenda seating chart.doc

5 CITY OF CERES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 15, 2018 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairperson Smith. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners: Condit, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith Commissioner Del Nero ALSO PRESENT: Senior Planner James Michaels, City Attorney Kerry Fuller, Administrative Secretary/Deputy City Clerk Ann Montgomery CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION: None CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Clerk s Report of Posting. The Agenda for the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of October 15, 2018 was posted on October 10, Approval of Minutes: a. September 17, 2018 (all present) ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Condit; seconded by Commissioner Kachel to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Condit, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith None Commissioner Del Nero Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.a. - Page 1

6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 15, 2018 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARINGS: PCDP Planned Community Development Plan (Time Extension); Proposal for a 1-year time extension request for a previously approved 20-unit multi-family residential project located at Blaker Road. Senior Planner, James Michaels presented the staff report. The Public Hearing was opened at 6:04 p.m. Josh Jantz, GDR Engineering, 3525 Mitchell Road, Suite G, Ceres, CA Mr. Jantz reported that he spoke with the applicant, Mr. Ledbetter this morning, as he is unable to attend the meeting tonight. Mr. Ledbetter is having his architect move forward with the floor plans, elevations, renderings, and will have GDR start on the improvement plans early next year. Chairperson Smith confirmed with Mr. Jantz that the Building Permits are expected to be issued before or by October 15, The Public Hearing was closed at 6:05 p.m. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Condit; seconded by Commissioner Kachel to approve PC Resolution Motion passed by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Condit, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith None Commissioner Del Nero NEW BUSINESS: None PUBLIC MEETING(S): None UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.a. - Page 2 2

7 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 15, 2018 MATTERS INITIATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF None REPORTS: Senior Planner, James Michaels announced that there will be a Special Planning Commission Meeting on Monday, October 29 th at 6:00 P.M. where the Whitmore Ranch Annexation project will be considered. ADJOURNMENT: The Commission adjourned at 6:07 p.m. to the scheduled Special Planning Commission meeting of Monday, October 29, APPROVED: ATTEST: Laurie Smith, Chairperson James Michaels, Acting Secretary I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\Minutes\2018\ draft.doc Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.a. - Page 3 3

8 CITY OF CERES SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 29, 2018 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairperson Smith. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: ABSENT: Commissioners: Condit, Del Nero Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith None ALSO PRESENT: Director of Community Development Tom Westbrook, City Manager Toby Wells, Senior Planner James Michaels, City Attorney Robin Baral, Planning Consultant Marjorie Blom, Administrative Secretary/Deputy City Clerk Ann Montgomery CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION: None CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS: Dave Pratt, Ceres Citizen Mr. Pratt made brief comments on two of the measures on the upcoming ballot. Mr. Pratt also noted that the roads in his neighborhood were slurried and he feels it was shoddy work. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Clerk s Report of Posting. The Agenda for the Special Meeting of the Planning Commission of October 29, 2018 was posted on October 18, Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 1

9 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Condit; seconded by Commissioner Del Nero to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Condit, Del Nero, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith None None CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None PUBLIC HEARINGS: 2. Hearing to consider a proposal for the Whitmore Ranch Specific Plan (14-10 WRSP). Prezoning (14-09 PZ) and Annexation (14-08 Annex) to guide development of 94 acres, including the certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH # ) under CEQA. Director of Community Development, Tom Westbrook stated that this evening we are considering recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council regarding the Whitmore Ranch Specific Plan and certification of the Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Westbrook explained that we will start by introducing Matthew Gerken with AECOM, who is going to provide a short PowerPoint presentation, outlining the overall project, and then he will follow up with some comments before we answer any questions that the Commission may have, followed by opening up the Public Hearing. Mr. Gerken thanked the Planning Commission and staff for their time and stated that he is here to answer any questions there may be and proceeded to provide a brief overview of the project, the Environmental Review process, the Findings from that process, the Public Review that occurred and then the Final EIR, responses to comments and considerations. Commission Questions: Commissioner Condit asked how many houses are in this project. Mr. Gerken replied that they are assuming up to 441. Commissioner Condit continued, and that would be a population increase of about 1500? Mr. Gerken stated 1485 or so. Commissioner Condit inquired, and the traffic increase is about 5%? Mr. Gerken explained that it depends on where you re talking about. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 2 2

10 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 Commissioner Condit clarified, on Whitmore Avenue. Mr. Gerken remarked that he did not have that percentage off the top of his head, but he did bring all the documents and can get that information for him. Commissioner Condit inquired about the mitigation options for schools, noting that it didn t have any listed in there. Mr. Condit asked if that was something that he was going to continue working with the School District on. Mr. Westbrook interjected, suggesting that perhaps he can answer some of these questions for Commissioner Condit and the Commission. He went on to explain that as Mr. Gerken indicated in his presentation, and as the Commission may recall, the City adopted it s General Plan latest update in May of this year. As we were going through the land use diagram portion of that, Whitmore Ranch was kind of in it s planning processes. What we did or what we had the benefit of doing was to include those land use designations as you see them in the Specific Plan. A lot of times what happens when you do a Specific Plan update, the City of jurisdiction has to change the land uses accordingly to match the General Plan after that action is taken or in conjunction with that. The other thing that s interesting to note about the Whitmore Ranch Specific Plan is that it s in the primary sphere of influence. So there s the primary sphere of influence, which is something that is adopted by LAFCO, which assumes that a property within those would be annexed within 10 years or so. This property and all of those down to Roeding Road out to Faith Home Road have been in the City s primary sphere of influence, actually since That was the previous General Plan Update, so it s been in here for a quite a while; just wanted to mention that. Mr. Westbrook continued, in terms of the area itself, as the Commission knows, La Rosa Elementary and Cesar Chavez Junior High are both schools within the annexation area. Both of those schools had gone through our process some number of years ago. He thinks for La Rosa, maybe 2005, and Cesar Chavez, 2009, but for an Out of Boundary Service Request. What that was, was the school district asking the City on their behalf to allow connection to water and sewer services. Those were both requests approved by LAFCO back in the day, and as part of that, the City is required to have the school district sign an Agreement to Annex. And so, if reorganization was ever considered at some future point, which it is now, the school district would be on board with the annexation. Furthermore, earlier this year, there was a gentleman who lives within the Specific Plan Area, and his well failed. It was going to be too costly to try to dig a new well, so he got an Out of Boundary Service Request because his well had failed and connected to City water. So, he has that same type of agreement to annex. In terms of the Mitigation Agreement that Commissioner Condit brought up, that has kind of been an ongoing thing. So, with the West Landing Specific Plan that was annexed back in 2011, the school district and the project proponents worked independently. The City wasn t involved in that. That agreement was done just prior to the Planning Commission meeting. West Landing Specific Plan does have a Mitigation Agreement in place with the School District and the project proponents for Whitmore Ranch have also engaged in the Mitigation Agreement discussion. At this point, they re not completely done, but they re working towards resolution and hope to have that shortly, prior to the consideration of any action by the City Council. So, the Mitigation Agreement is in process. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 3 3

11 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 A couple other things Mr. Westbrook wanted to point out, specifically about Whitmore Ranch and some of the improvements that are going to be made: As the Commission may be aware, the City was able to secure a Safe-Routes-to School grant, and so that he believes is going to be under construction next year, which will make improvements to Whitmore Avenue. What was holding it up was, (we ve had the grant for quite some time), was getting the necessary right-of-way from the property owners to put in those improvements that will widen Whitmore Avenue on the south side to four lanes with a sidewalk so the kids can get to and from Cesar Chavez and La Rosa Elementary on the south side of Whitmore Avenue. The last thing Mr. Westbrook wanted to mention, with any residential annexation, there is sometimes a deficit in the amount of revenue that needs to be collected. What he means by that is when a new residential development is proposed and ultimately constructed, the City will receive property taxes from that home at some future point; the residents there will buy goods and services in Ceres; they ll pay sales tax which includes the Measure H tax as well. And then what s unique to this area and all of Eastgate and some of the other residential developments that have happened since 2000, is they re required to annex into a Community Facilities District. So this is another assessment that is placed on their property taxes yearly. We anticipate that that amount will be approximately $780, and those funds collected will be split between Police, Fire and Park Maintenance. So those will pay for kind of an ongoing thing. He believes the percentages are 55% for Police, 35% for Fire and 10% for the Parks component. So, if you assume the numbers that Mr. Gerken has indicated, that s kind of the maximum amount. It would probably generate around $325,000 per year at full buildout. Mr. Westbrook reiterated that he just wanted to mention those items and specifically address Commissioner Condit s question about the Mitigation Agreement. That is in play and he believes there s a representative from the School District here tonight to speak on that as well. Commissioner Condit stated he wanted to be clear that $325,000, once all the houses are built Mr. Westbrook clarified that s correct at buildout; that s only assessed once the homes are built. And that would assume that they built that higher number. If the development is a little less dense and they only build 385 houses, it would fall below that. Mr. Westbrook stated that he and Mr. Gerken are now available for any questions there may be. Commissioner Kachel commented, in following up on that same thought pattern, there s a shortfall in the parks open space, about 7/10 of acre in this thing, based on the General Plan standard. It s proposed to be addressed through an impact fee collection process. What was the thinking behind that as opposed to providing the extra 7/10 of an acre? Mr. Westbrook explained, just the mechanics of it all. The parks; basically, we attempted to design that, (and Matthew can jump in and correct him), to kind of be somewhat equitable across all property owners, so that it wasn t a significant burden or Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 4 4

12 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 impact to any one of the property owners. So, everybody kind of proportionately shares in the amount of park planned and by doing that it showed us just under the 7/10 under. Commissioner Kachel stated that it hadn t occurred to him that would be an issue with the different landowners and he could see that. But the Parks department is comfortable with handling it this way, but it does leave a little bit of a shortfall. He knows, in this day and age, recreation space, open space is difficult to find for sports teams practice and what not, since they can t use school properties any more, noting like when his kids were young, they would go down to the school and practice. So, we re comfortable that we re still having adequate standards given the situation? Mr. Westbrook replied yes and noted, actually in our inventory, there are two parks, neighborhood parks that we have yet to develop; there s Neel Park in the north and Lions Park off of Central Avenue. City Manager Toby Wells interjected, and Eastgate Park as well. Commissioner Kachel remarked, in the same general area. Mr. Wells added, and this is consistent with the public facilities program where basically if you were to build the full acreage of the park, that s creditable against your fee. You don t pay both. You don t pay a fee and develop parks. It s kind of six of one, half a dozen of another. The idea is to make sure it s consistent across the whole General Plan area. When you get into the Specific Plan, that s where you have these little bit of differences; one that s equitable across to all the property owners, but one that s also equitable across the City because it doesn t all develop in a nice clear, clean area. It comes in pieces, so when you have that ability, that mix and match allows us to, in this case, to get almost all of it and that differential is made up of with a fee. Commissioner Kachel asked; so you re addressing the City s requirements and the reality of the land-owner situation. Mr. Wells replied that s correct. Commissioner Kachel responded thank you very much; he appreciates the answer. Commissioner Condit inquired, for the traffic increase on Whitmore Avenue, do we see any updates or anything that we re going to have to do to Whitmore Avenue; are we going to have to put in a stop light? Mr. Wells explained that the 5% increase that Commissioner Condit referenced, the 5% over existing conditions. But, recognize that the General Plan assumes Whitmore Avenue, a 5-lane facility at buildout of the whole area. So, this increase is over what s developed today, but that doesn t see where the traffic would be at full buildout for the General Plan. So there are mitigation measures put into place in terms of traditional traffic signals, that are in the Specific Plan along Whitmore, so there are additional measures that are incorporated in this part of the project. The Public Hearing was opened at 6:21 p.m. Dave Pratt, Ceres Citizen Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 5 5

13 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 Mr. Pratt stated that he is still pushing for a traffic signal at Moore Road and Whitmore Avenue and asked if that was in the plan. Mr. Wells replied, no it is not. Mr. Pratt noted that currently the traffic backs up there, turning south on Moore Road, and then once they get on Moore Road they just take right off. With building there, traffic is really going to increase especially with Hughson increasing their population. He sees that during the weekdays, there s a lot of traffic that takes Moore Road. They don t go to Whitmore, he means Mitchell Road, and a lot of times they take Moore Road all the way down to Service. Sometimes they ll turn at Roeding and most times they don t slow down. Just as this project keeps moving forward, he s going to keep pushing for a traffic light there. Patricia Cousins, 3831, 3841 & 3865 Roeding Road, Ceres, CA Mrs. Cousins stated that she realizes it s pointless for her to be here. She realizes her minority position representing herself and her family, who are partly her rural neighbors, in opposition to the desire, it seems of all the developers to take away our City seal, if that s the right word for it; replace the cornucopia and all the produce that is so abundantly shown, with houses, apartments, cars and roads. She is against it. She continues to oppose it. She and her sisters have submitted opposition to the desire to pave over the land. Again, she recommends the alternative with the west side, West Landing, whatever the development there that was annexed is called, and that it might be developed first before more land is destroyed. Thank you. Dan Pangrazio, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services, Ceres Unified School District Mr. Pangrazio stated that he is here to provide an update on the School District s position regarding the development, noting that Mr. Westbrook s characterization is pretty accurate. Mr. Romano, who has quite a bit of experience with drafting Mitigation Agreements, has come into the picture here in recent weeks. But quite honestly, in the months before we hadn t made much progress, but recently we had a meeting with him and also the developers, and so we have been making quite a bit of progress in addressing a mitigation agreement, the concerns of the school district that we ve expressed in our comments to the Draft EIR. He noted that they have a meeting coming up in a couple days, and hopefully a series of meetings after that to get our general understanding down in writing. There are still quite a bit of details to iron out, and really from the School District s perspective at this point, unless there s a surprise we re not thinking of, really it s the timeline that s the biggest issue at this point, because based on people s schedules and working out the details, to have it completed and the Mitigation Agreement signed by the 13 th when this would go to the Council, is a little bit of a tall order. Our joint goal is to get there. And, as we ve said before, we re not for or against the development; that s not the School District s role. But the Mitigation Agreement, as we ve been discussing in general terms would satisfy our concerns, and then we would not be opposed. If we do not have a Mitigation Agreement signed by the 13 th, then that becomes a little more problematic. Don t know where we would end up standing at that point, in terms of the next steps; we would have to cross that bridge when we get there. But, he does know that their concerns would still stand as of the 13 th, if we don t have Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 6 6

14 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 the Mitigation Agreement in writing. But, his main point here in providing an update is we are on a good path and we re negotiating in good faith and he does believe that we ll get there. He s just not sure by the 13 th, to be completely honest. Commissioner Kachel asked if the School District is comfortable with the circulation pattern out there, as it affects the schools and the kids, whether it be vehicular and/or pedestrian. Mr. Pangrazio responded that he thinks the way we have to break it out, and this is how we think of it; with the new development, the question is what mitigation measures do we believe are reasonable, based on the traffic that will increase, traffic that will be created and brought to bear on this area directly adjacent to our schools, right? So, what the conditions are now, are the conditions that are there now. That s what we re dealing with. Beforehand, it wasn t one of our best areas in terms of traffic. We ve gotten many areas in the district where we have concerns or complaints from parents that don t think the traffic is good enough. We deal with the concerns all the time; we hear those concerns and do what we can to try to mitigate those concerns. But, specifically, with this development, we re looking at what increased traffic would be brought to bear, based on that. So, there are a lot of different options for what the circulation may be. It s very general in the General Plan, so it s very difficult to know what roads are going to built out when and what happens when annexation happens. There are a lot of unknowns there, so without getting too far into the details, with our Mitigation Agreement right now, it s about honing in to specific options, of portions of roads, right around the development being built out prior to earlier phases, of potentially than what they would otherwise and parts of roads that might not have been created at all; particularly Standford Road and then also Esmar. We ve got a couple of different kinds of options in play in our conversations, but those options that we ve got in front of us; both options, if they end up working, would satisfy our concerns for that reasonable measure of what do we believe the developers responsibility is to mitigate the specific increase to traffic, that it would create on our school. Commissioner Kachel remarked that he knows you can never satisfy all the parents that pick up their kids or take to school. That goes without saying. We just want to make sure that this project doesn t create a worse situation or a bad situation. That s what we re here to do the planning for. Mr. Pangrazio added, and that s why he s here because he has to look ahead one year, five years, ten years. He wants to be able to look that parent in the eye at the stakeholder meeting and say, this came up, we addressed it, we felt strongly about it; this is what we were able to accomplish. If we weren t able to accomplish it, then they need to understand that we re going to be fighting for those needs along the way. That s what would happen, in this kind of case, let s say if we didn t have the Mitigation Agreement go into place. We will not be satisfied with that outcome unless there s a Mitigation Agreement in place. Commissioner Kachel agreed and noted that he s always a little uncomfortable proceeding with something when something is not in place, but he also realizes that part of the process is to work on these discussions, you ve got a new player apparently involved in the process. They re very experienced in that field so you re comfortable that the things are on the table that you need to be able to track. Hopefully you ll get it resolved before it gets to the Council, before the Council can make a decision. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 7 7

15 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 Chairperson Smith added, and it s a condition. Mr. Westbrook stated that the City has nothing to do with the Mitigation Agreement. It s between the Developer and the School District. We re certainly supportive of the project proponent and the School District getting together. We want both to be happy, and so they re working through that, but it s not necessarily a condition. Mr. Pangrazio remarked, correct him if he s wrong, but part of that question goes to, so what happens if, what happens if we re not there. And he believes the next step which would be undesirable for all, would be essentially a lawsuit; School District v. City, right? Through CEQA, we ve got 30 days? Mr. Westbrook responded that they don t anticipate that it s going to get to that point. There has been a ton of movement he believes through Mr. Pangrazio and Mr. Romano saying that they re going to get there. He believes all indications are, it s going to get done. Commissioner Kachel stated that s what he was trying to get at. These things do take time and they can be complicated. It s been on the table the whole time. He remembers that Mr. Pangrazio raised some of these issues when this thing was first getting started. Mr. Pangrazio came before the Commission and talked about some of the same things. And now it s coming down to; well this is probably the 11 th hour. The 12 th hour is the City Council Meeting and hopefully it s resolved by then. And they can both get up and say, we ve satisfied that. Mr. Pangrazio remarked, that s everyone s desire and we re on that path right now. He thinks it would be ignorant for us to say that it s not possible. That s something that could go in the other direction. If it does, then it s going to be a problem. We re going to have to take whatever action is necessary at that point. But again, he is being very candid; he doesn t anticipate that. He thinks we re on the path. We do have a lot of work to do though; he is going to keep reiterating. He doesn t know where we ll be on the 13 th. So we could do, at that point, if we don t have the Mitigation Agreement done and signed, then our stance would then have to be that we are in opposition and we have all the same concerns, still stand. That s what our position would have to be even if we re still working on creating the deal. Commissioner Kachel told Mr. Pangrazio that he appreciates his openness and willingness to discuss. Chairperson Smith agreed. Commissioner Condit asked Mr. Westbrook, if they don t have something signed by the 13 th, can the Council table? Mr. Westbrook replied that that s an option that is afforded the Council. Commissioner Condit interjected; to grant more time. Mr. Westbrook continued, to grant more time, certainly. He doesn t think that staff is desirous to just move this forward. We ve just kind of been plotting down a path. We re Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 8 8

16 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 trying to keep them on the 13 th so if the Council elects to move forward, then we can start the process for the LAFCO application. But if need be, the Council is totally within their prevue to say, okay, we re going to take public testimony, but we want to make sure the Agreement is done. That s up to them. Commissioner Kachel stated that it s just about trusting the process to get things done. Mr. Westbrook agreed, noting that the City and School District have a great relationship and have for a long time. So, we re not looking to jeopardize that in any way. Mr. Pangrazio agreed and stated, absolutely. Dave Romano Mr. Romano stated that it was a great pleasure to be in attendance this evening, on behalf of the Alvernaz family. Mr. Romano explained that the Alvernazes own about 20 acres that would be right in the center of the residential area. So, if you look at this Specific Plan, what you ll see are about 36 acres of School District on the far eastern edge, which includes the Middle School and the Elementary School, and then there are three 20-acre blocks. In the middle is the Alvernaz property; it s actually a singular 20-acre piece. Between them and the school are the Gaede Properties, about 10-acres and then there are three smaller 3-acre pieces. Then if you go to the west, near Moore Road, there are a number of pieces over there. The Alvernaz family has funded this entire effort. Ceres City staff put together a really competent design team, which involves AECOM. They did a great job on your Specific Plan and EIR. It involved K.D. Anderson Transportation and Engineering that does most of the work in the central valley. We re all very comfortable with them. And, O Dell Engineering, a high quality engineering firm, out of Modesto, did the infrastructure planning. You ve really got a good plan. He mentioned that he was not involved from the very beginning, but this project started about 4 years ago. It just shows you again how long and difficult the planning process is, but everybody stuck through with it to this point, and he got involved to try to assist with some closure on some things. And really, we talked about the School District here. The School District made a response letter. It s kind of a challenge, because about 20 years ago, the school districts and the development community got together and went up to Sacramento, and actually did a deal that was supposed to forever resolve disputes between school districts and developers. It was called Senate Bill 50. It set up Level I Fees, Level II Fees, Level III fees, if you ever hear those referred to, and, it worked for about ten years. But what happened was the cost of school construction grew faster than the cost of fee collection. So, school districts generally speaking take the position that even though state law is that we can collect Level I, Level II and Level III fees, we only collect, instead of 50% of what we should get, with the State matching the other 50%, we only collect about 30%-40%. And that s where on annexation projects, not on infill projects; if you buy a lot in the City of Ceres, and you re going to build a house, you would just currently pay the Level II fees - $4.13 per square foot, and that s what you would pay. But an annexation project, the school districts are concerned that they re bigger; they re going to generate more students; they want to make sure they re fully funded. And so, when we did the West Landing project, on the west side of town, we had a lot of negotiations. He dealt with Mr. Siegel, who is now the Superintendent. The same lawyers; we came up with the mitigation agreement, that created a more robust fee collection program. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 9 9

17 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 And so on the far west side of town, they ll pay more. We re having those discussions right now. What s unique here, is part of those discussions, is also the pace with which we provide some circulation because the school site is on a dead end. A lot of people show up there in the morning. They re kind of there at the same time. They ve staggered the schools starting times to try to avoid some of that traffic issue, but they realize that there s going to be some more homes. It s not an environmental issue under CEQA. CEQA analyzes, does it exceed level of service need; when do we need the traffic signals? The type of conversation we re having is really, when do we build Esmar, how do we connect it through the neighborhood and get people up to Whitmore? And we ve actually had some time to meet with the Gaede family, who are between the Alvernaz property and the School District, to get them to agree to work with us to get right-of-way sooner so we can create more looping, more circulation paths on the west side of the School District, and then maybe the School District will be able to work on getting some access points into the school sites from the west side as well, to take some of the load off of Eastgate. That s the kind of the conversation we re having; it s not a CEQA project, not a CEQA issue, it s not a Specific Plan issue, but we re working that out. He is confident; it s always the imminence of hearings that make the discussions become a little bit more robust and bring them to closure. But, we ve done this before; it s not out of the ordinary. He appreciates Mr. Pangrazio s time; Dr. Siegel s time. We ll be talking to their counsel after this hearing to kind of start buttoning things up. We have a standard form agreement that we used on West Landing. It s got a lot of pages in it, but most of that s boiler plate. We re just going to have to work on a few little parts of that. He s optimistic that we re going to get there. The project is consistent with Ceres General Plan. He s appreciative of all of staff s work, your neighbor s work, and working with us. He is here to answer any questions there may be. On behalf of the Alvernazes, this project has come before you after a long path, and is ready to move forward and be approved. He thanked the Commission for their time and reiterated that he s available for any questions. Commissioner Condit asked what fee level this project would fall under. Mr. Romano replied that the Ceres School District currently collects Level II fees, and Level II fees are at $4.13 per square foot based upon the current report. They redo that report every year; it adjusts a bit every year, and there are rules and parameters that allow them to collect Level II. If they don t meet those, they collect Level I, which he thinks is currently $3.79. And, if the state runs out of money in the Bond program, and you re a Level II district, it just goes to Level III, which is basically double Level II. But, take that number, and multiply it by two; $8.26 per square foot. There are no Level II districts that he knows of. The state has passed the bond and so there is the availability of bond funding, but it is up to the Governor to keep that bond funding replenished and these districts get in line for that money. But currently it s Level II; a long answer to a short question. The Public Hearing was closed at 6:39 p.m. Commissioner Condit thanked the Developers willingness to work with the City and the School District. They ve put a lot of time and effort into this. He went onto explain that his feeling on this project is we can t move forward right now. You ve heard him echo this; public safety concerns and traffic concerns since he s been on the Commission. His views haven t changed, especially on expanding our City limits. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 10 10

18 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Kachel; seconded by Commissioner Del Nero to recommend to the City Council the following: 1) Certification of the Whitmore Ranch EIR of the proposed project, making findings, as set forth in Resolution No , including Appendix A; 2) Approval of the project, including adoption of the Whitmore Ranch Specific Plan and related Financing Plan, as set forth in Resolution No ; 3) Prezoning of the Whitmore Ranch Specific Plan area, subject to the findings contained in Resolution No ; that would include adoption of the Statement of Overriding Conditions, finding the project benefits outweigh the environmental impacts identified. 4) Recommend Council initiate proceedings for annexation to file with LAFCO. Motion passed by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Del Nero, Johnson, Kachel, Chairperson Smith Commissioner Condit None Chairperson Smith thanked Mr. Romano, the School District, Mr. Gerken, Mr. Alvernaz; stating the Commission appreciates their time. NEW BUSINESS: None PUBLIC MEETING(S): None UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None MATTERS INITIATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF None REPORTS: Commissioner Condit reminded everyone that Election Day is next Tuesday; remember to vote. Director of Community Development, Tom Westbrook reminded the Commission that the Halloween festival that used to be held in this building; this year they re doing something different. It s a Trunk or Treat that is going to be held on downtown 4 th Street, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Halloween night. ADJOURNMENT: Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 11 11

19 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 29, 2018 The Commission adjourned at 6:43 p.m. to the next regular scheduled Planning Commission meeting of Monday, November 5, APPROVED: ATTEST: Laurie Smith, Chairperson Tom Westbrook, Secretary I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\Minutes\2018\ PC Special Meeting draft.doc Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 2.b. - Page 12 12

20 Planning and Building Division 2220 Magnolia Street Ceres, CA Fax CITY COUNCIL Chris Vierra, Mayor Ken Lane Bret Durossette Mike Kline Linda Ryno STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION December 3, 2018 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Planning Commission James Michaels, Senior Planner Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Time Extension; Proposal for a one (1) year time extension for a previously approved project associated with the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility. APPLICATION FILED: September 20, 2018 DEEMED COMPLETE: November 5, 2018 LOCATION: 1930 E. Hatch Road, Modesto, CA, GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: SURROUNDING USES: APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT S REPRESENTATIVE: O, Office A-P, Administrative Professional North: School/training facility, Hatch Road, TID Lateral # 1 South: Central Valley Christian Academy and ball field, and apartment complex East: Church and Summit Charter Academy West: Residential care facility and church Dr. Meetinder Rai 2840 Glasgow Drive Ceres, CA Gary Rogers, Architect 450 S. Madera Avenue Madera, CA Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 1

21 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION The applicant is requesting approval of a one (1) year time extension for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application to allow the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility at 1930 E. Hatch Road (see Plan Sheet SP1, page 27). This proposed project is the same one that was originally approved by the City Planning Commission on September 8, 2009 and again on March 20, The project site is a /- acre parcel located on the south side of Hatch Road, approximately 200 feet east of Stonum Road and 800 feet west of Central Avenue (see Vicinity Map, page 23). Approximately one acre of the site is partially developed with an existing medical office building with the remaining portion as undeveloped with vegetation that would be characterized as invasive weeds. Curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements exist along the site s frontage area of Hatch Road. The parcel is surrounded with a school and training facility to the north, a residential care facility and a church to the west, an apartment complex and a school with a ball field to the south, and a church and school to the east. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING COMPLIANCE The project site is designated Office (O) in the General Plan and is zoned Administrative Professional (A-P). The O General Plan designation allows for medical, professional, administrative, and general office. This previously approved project meets the intent of the General Plan and Zoning designation and the time extension request does not conflict with the City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. BACKGROUND At its March 20, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission considered a proposal involving a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) entitlement for the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility located at 1930 E. Hatch Road (see Site Plan, page 27). The Planning Commission determined that the conditions of approval for the project appropriately addressed the matters discussed by the Commission, and approved the project by a 5-0 vote. PROJECT PROPOSAL CUP TIME EXTENSION Site Plan and Operation The applicant is requesting Planning Commission approval of a one year time extension for the previously approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP) entitlement that proposes the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility and the construction of landscaping and parking area improvements for the use (see Plan Sheets, pages 27-30). The request will allow the applicant to continue to prepare the construction plans necessary for building permit Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 2

22 submittal to the State of California. Items generally discussed at the March 20, 2017 meeting, included: The proposed facility being primarily intended to provide care for persons 60 years of age and over, as well as persons under 60 years of age with compatible needs. The facility will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, and it is estimated that the operation will require 130 employees to manage the facility of which 60 employees will be designated for the day shift, 40 employees for the evening shift, and 30 employees for the night shift. The existing medical office building will maintain the same operating hours as currently exists from 9am 5pm, Monday through Friday, with an estimated staff count of 12 full and part-time employees. The 175-bed facility requires 59 parking spaces and the existing medical office use requires 29 parking spaces for a total of 88 parking spaces. The project maintains 147 parking spaces to serve both facilities. The project includes a combination of species of trees and shrubs to be distributed throughout the site, as well as a 6-foot tall perimeter wall for the facility. It should be noted that with the time extension request, no portion of the project, which has already been approved by the Planning Commission will change. Everything remains the same but the expiration date for approval is extended. Staff Comments Staff supports the time extension request based on the following: 1. The time extension request does not conflict with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. 2. With the conditions of approval imposed for the proposal, the project remains consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. 3. The use is suitable to the site and is not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the public. 4. The applicant is merely requesting a time extension and all of the previously approved Planning Commission conditions of approval remain in effect. Approval of the time extension will be valid through December 3, CEQA The time extension request was reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it was determined that the time extension request is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects). Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 3

23 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the time extension request for this project subject to the findings and conditions contained in the Draft PC Resolution. REQUIRED ACTION Approval of this project requires the following actions by the Planning Commission: 1. Make the determination that the time extension request is consistent with the original project and that approval of a time extension is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act. 2. Approval of CUP Time Extension subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached Draft Resolution PC Attachments: Pages 5-22 Draft PC Resolution Vicinity Map Minutes of March 20, 2017 Planning Commission Meeting 26 Applicant s to Staff on Project s Status dated September 21, Site Plan 28 Landscape Plan 29 Floor Plan 30 Building Elevations I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\staff reports\2017\17-01 CUP Time Extension (175-bed rehab & nursing facility).doct Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 4

24 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: CITY OF CERES When Recorded mail to: City of Ceres Planning and Building Division 2220 Magnolia Street Ceres, CA DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. PC RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CERES PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 47,348 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 175 BED REHABILITATION AND NURSING FACILITY AT 1930 E. HATCH ROAD. APPLICATION NUMBER CUP TIME EXTENSION. PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT/ REPRESENTATIVE: Dr. Meetinder Rai 2840 Glasgow Drive Ceres, CA ATTN: Gary Rogers, Architect 450 S. Madera Avenue Madera, CA SITE LOCATION: 1930 E. Hatch Road, Modesto, CA, APN: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Ceres, State of California, has considered said application for a one (1) year time extension for a previously approved project associated with the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility at 1930 E. Hatch Road; and, WHEREAS, the property affected by this resolution is located at 1930 E. Hatch Road, Modesto, CA, 95351; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on December 3, 2018, at 6:00 p.m. and considered all testimony and comment presented whether orally or in writing; and, Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 5

25 WHEREAS, the property affected by this resolution is described as: Parcels A and B as shown on that certain Parcel Map filed July 20, 1973 in Book 17 of Parcel Maps, Page 59, Stanislaus County Records. Excepting therefrom that portion described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Parcel A, thence North West along the west line of said Parcel A, a distance of feet to a corner of the west line of said Parcel A and the True Point of Beginning, thence South East along a line of said Parcel A, a distance of feet, to a corner of said Parcel A; thence South West, a distance of feet; thence North West along a line 9.50 feet south of and parallel with said East- West line of Parcel A, a distance of feet to a point on the westerly line of said Parcel A; thence North West along the westerly line of Said Parcel A, a distance of 9.50 feet to the True Point of Beginning. ` WHEREAS, the Planning Commission based on the evidence within the staff report and project file find that: 1. The proposed time extension for the previously approved Conditional Use Permit application is consistent with the purpose and intent of the O, Office designation of the Ceres General Plan. 2. The proposed time extension for the previously approved Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the Administrative Professional (A-P) zoning designation as conditioned. 3. The proposed one-year time extension will have no adverse effect on surrounding properties. 4. The proposed one-year time extension will not endanger any wildlife or wildlife habitat. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Ceres as follows: Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby confirms that the Conditional Use Permit is Categorically Exempt and is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to Section 15332, Class 32 (In Fill Development projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 2. The time extension for Conditional Use Permit is hereby extended for a period of one (1) year subject to compliance with the conditions of the original approval, which are contained in this resolution and Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 6

26 attached as Exhibit A and on file in the Planning and Building Division, and shall be binding on all heirs, assignees, and successors in interest of said property. Section 3. The Director of Community Development or designee is hereby directed to record this Resolution at the office of the County Recorder of the County of Stanislaus. Section 4. The conditions of project approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section (d) (1), these conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the ninety (90) day appeal period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, and reservations other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section (a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this ninety (90) day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exaction. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Ceres at a regular meeting of said Planning Commission held on the 3 rd day of December 2018, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: TOM WESTBROOK, SECRETARY OF THE CERES PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CERES Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 7

27 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit # Time Extension City of Ceres 1930 E. Hatch Road, Modesto, CA, Prepared: November 15, 2018 Approved by the Planning Commission: December 3, 2018 Approved by the City Council: N/A Amended by Staff/PC/CC on N/A A. PROJECT AUTHORIZATION 1. The project shall be in conformance with all City Ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies. The conditions listed below are particularly pertinent to this approval but shall not be construed to permit violation of other laws and policies not so listed. 2. Approval is limited to the conformance of the land use and zoning. Use of the property shall be limited to those permitted by the A-P zoning district as applicable, as it exists now or may be amended in the future. 3. The one-year time extension for the previously approved Conditional Use Permit shall expire within 12 months (December 3, 2019) unless a building permit is issued, or the use is exercised, or a request for extension is received by the City prior to expiration of the permit and approved by the Planning Commission. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER TO BE AWARE OF THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THIS ENTITLEMENT AND TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO ENSURE THE APPROVAL OF THIS ENTITLEMENT REMAINS VALID. IT SHALL NOT BE THE CITY OF CERES RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER OF THE PROJECT S EXPIRATION DATE. IF AN APPROVED ENTITLEMENT EXPIRES, THE APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A NEW APPLICATION REQUEST FOR THIS PROJECT. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 8

28 B. PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS Prior to issuance of a Final Site Plan Map, the applicant shall demonstrate conformance to the following conditions to the satisfaction of the City of Ceres: 1. The applicant shall respond in writing to all conditions contained in this document and its attachments. Responses shall describe how the condition has been met and shall, where applicable; direct the plan checker to the page and/or drawing detail that demonstrates compliance with the condition. These changes shall be indicated with a delta or cloud symbol. A copy of these responses shall be provided with each set of the final site map and improvement plans. These changes shall be approved by the Planning Division PRIOR to the submittal, and City acceptance, of a Building Permit application. 2. This Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is approved to allow for the construction of a 47,348 square foot building for the development of a 175-bed rehabilitation and nursing facility, and the required parking areas to serve the operation. 3. The State of California Division of the State Architect is the primary regulatory agency for the proposed building. However, the State of California also gives authority to the City of Ceres Fire Department to conduct the final inspections prior to occupancy of the building, thus allowing the City to impose conditions of approval on the project to ensure compliance with City requirements. As such, the Fire Department shall work with the Planning and Building Division to ensure that the project meets all conditions of approval imposed by the City of Ceres. The applicant shall complete all conditions of approval listed under Item B (Project Specific Conditions) and Item C (General Conditions of Approval) associated with this Conditional Use Permit to the satisfaction of the City prior to granting occupancy of the building. 4. The applicant shall provide the landscaping improvements for the project as illustrated with the project Site Plan (SP1) and Landscape Plan (LP1). Prior to issuance of building permit(s) for the project, the applicant shall enter into a Landscape Maintenance Agreement (between the applicant and the City), which shall be signed and executed prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. The project s landscape and irrigation plans shall meet State of California s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) standards to the satisfaction of the City. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 9

29 5. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the project shall require the approval of a Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) to adjust the lot line shared between Parcels A and B (as created per Parcel Map filed July 20, 1973 in Book 17 of Parcel Maps, Page 59, Stanislaus County Records) such that the lot line does not encroach into the proposed building. The applicant has the option of merging these two parcels into one lot if desired. 6. In reference to Condition of Approval B-5 noted above with this CUP entitlement, unless the applicant desires to merge Parcels A and B (as created per Parcel Map filed July 20, 1973 in Book 17 of Parcel Maps, Page 59, Stanislaus County Records) into one lot, the applicant shall then be required to record irrevocable reciprocal access and parking easements. The easements shall be recorded for all portions of the drive aisles that are shown on the site plan. The applicant shall submit the irrevocable reciprocal access easement to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. The applicant shall obtain approval of a City of Ceres building permit for the project and shall pay all applicable fees, including but not limited to: City of Ceres Public Facility Fees, Stanislaus County Public Facility Fees, and Ceres Unified School District fees. These fees are adjusted annually. The applicant shall pay the fees in place at the time the building permit is issued. 8. Prior to occupancy of the building associated with this Conditional Use Permit, the applicant shall complete the following project related improvements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department and Public Works Department: a. Installation of all water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain systems, and related utilities required to serve the project. b. The applicant shall design on-site stormwater retention in multiple catchment areas with infiltration system designed for a particular area with interlocking overflow. The system will be designed to be completely out of all drive aisles and City right-of-way to the satisfaction of the City Engineering Services Department. c. Replacement of damaged concrete curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the project frontage areas of Hatch Road. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 10

30 d. Installation of all project parking and landscaping improvements, as well as the pedestrian walkways as shown on the Site Plan. e. The applicant shall be required to underground all existing overhead utility lines along the project frontage area of Hatch Road and shall place all new utility services to this development underground. Additionally, the applicant shall be responsible for half the cost of undergrounding the utilities on the opposite side of the project frontage area of Hatch Road, which can be satisfied by completing one of the following: i. Submittal to the City of the appropriate payment that represents half the cost of undergrounding utilities along both sides of the street along the frontage of Hatch Road (as determined by the Engineering Services Department). ii. Enter into a deferred undergrounding improvement agreement with the City to guarantee half the cost of utility undergrounding along both sides of the street along the frontage of Hatch Road, if these improvements are requested by the City within the next 10 years, and if the area to be undergrounded is at least the entire block long. f. Installation of street lights, striping and signing, paving, and any necessary transitions in accordance with the City of Ceres Procedures, Standard Specifications and Standard Details. g. A bus turn-out on Hatch Road, located east of the driveway entrance into the site. The turn-out shall include a shelter and bench to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department. h. Provide the four trash enclosures for the facility as illustrated on the site plan. Trash enclosures shall meet the requirements as identified in the City of Ceres Water Efficient Guidelines and Standards. Placement of the enclosures, size and design, shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Ceres. i. The developer shall construct a 6-foot tall masonry engineered wall along the west, east, and south property lines. The design, materials, and color shall be reviewed Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 11

31 and approved administratively by the Engineering Services Department. The wall shall be built prior to the occupancy of the building. j. Installation of bicycle facilities to the satisfaction of the City of Ceres. k. Provide decorative stamped paving along ingress/egress area at entryway and drive aisle area as shown on the project site plan. l. Ensure that maintenance access to the interior courtyard area is provided as illustrated on the project floor plan. 9. Prior to occupancy of the proposed building, the applicant shall obtain a business license from the City for the operation. 10. Prior to occupancy of the proposed building, the applicant shall take the following measures to improve the appearance of the existing medical office building to the satisfaction of the Planning Division: a. Since the City s Sign Ordinance allows only one freestanding sign per parcel and the applicant will be providing a new freestanding sign for the rehabilitation and nursing facility, the applicant shall remove the two existing freestanding signs associated with the medical office facility. All existing wall signage intended for the medical office building shall be appropriately maintained or replaced as necessary with new wall signage. b. The applicant shall repaint the exterior of the medical office building with color(s) and texture(s) compatible with the proposed building and incorporate appropriate materials and colors to screen the existing roof top equipment. 11. The applicant will be responsible to construct one 8-inch diameter water supply line from Hatch Road to serve the project. The City will, at the applicant s expense, provide a compound meter with a backflow prevention device. If adequate space is not available to place the meter and backflow device between the back of the sidewalk and the property line (right-of-way line), then the applicant shall provide an easement for these facilities to be installed and maintained by the City. 12. Exterior lighting associated with this facility shall be maintained in a manner so as not to cause glare upon any adjacent property or public right-of-way. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 12

32 13. The building associated with this Conditional Use Permit shall incorporate the exterior materials and colors as approved by the Planning Commission and are representative of the plan drawn by Gary Rogers - Architect, received January 19, If the applicant desires to make any changes to the colors or materials for the proposed buildings, such request shall be made in writing and shall receive prior approval from the Director of Community Development or designee prior to their installation. 14. The applicant shall provide a grease interceptor for the kitchen facility proposed for the project to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department and Public Works Department. 15. Any roof top mechanical equipment for the new building shall be screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 16. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Turlock Irrigation District (TID). For any proposed relocation of a pole or electrical facility, the applicant shall apply for a facility change through TID. Facility changes are performed at the applicant s expense. 17. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District regarding Rule 9510 to the satisfaction of the City of Ceres. If applicable, applicants shall submit verification of compliance or payment of fee to the satisfaction of the Director of Permits Services or designee from the Air District prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. The applicant shall provide As-Built drawings of the improvements including plan and profiles of the water, sanitary sewer and storm drain systems. Alignments shall be tied to a monumented property corner. C. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Division 1. Development shall conform to the plans designated by the City Planning Division as Final Exhibit. Final exhibit shall consist of the submitted map(s), site plan, floor plans, elevations and landscape plans amended by the applicant to reflect any changes indicated above in, Item B, Project Specific Conditions or required by the City in the approval process. The applicant shall submit any required amended site plans to the Planning Division within 90- Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 13

33 days of project approval. Failure to submit the amended plans will result in a delay in processing and/or approval of those plans. 2. The applicant shall construct all required parking and related onsite circulation improvements as indicated above in, Item B, Project Specific Conditions. 3. The development impact fees and project processing fees due in connection with this project shall be based upon the fees in effect at the time the fee is paid unless modified by a Development Agreement or other mechanism approved by the City. All developers of property within this project site shall pay the appropriate City and County Public Facility Fees, Ceres Unified School District Fees and other applicable fees in place. These fees may be adjusted yearly based on the construction cost index or other method as approved by the City. 4. The Planning Division may approve minor amendments to the permit, provided the permit is still in substantial conformance with the original approval. A request for a minor amendment shall be submitted in writing to the Planning Division. 5. Any plans associated with the permit shall be in substantial compliance to the approved site plan and the development shall be consistent with applicable sections of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and applicable master plan. Violation of any provision(s) may result in code enforcement action, which may include revocation of permit and/or monetary penalties. 6. The applicant shall meet all requirements of Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources, Pacific Gas & Electric, AT&T, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Turlock Irrigation District (TID) and other utility agencies serving the project site to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. 7. Prior to any construction activity, the developer shall inform all contractors of the possibilities that human remains may be found on the site during construction activities. The applicant shall consult with the Native American Heritage Commission for recommended procedures if human remains are found. 8. The developer will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, employees and volunteers from and against all claims, lawsuits, or causes of action (whether brought solely against the City or jointly against both City, developer, or others), damages, losses, and expenses, including attorney fees, arising in Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 14

34 any manner out of the approval or the application approved herein, including, without limitation, all actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul the permit granted pursuant to the City s approval of the application referenced herein, provided the City notifies the developer within a reasonable time of any such claim, action or proceeding, and cooperates in the defense of such claims, actions or proceedings. 9. As determined by the City, the applicant shall secure all necessary easements for reciprocal access, parking, emergency vehicle access (EVA), landscaping and/or public utilities over the proposed property. Where, required, these easements shall be recorded prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 10. The applicant shall be required to landscape and irrigate the property as stipulated by the City of Ceres Water Efficient Guidelines and Standards. An applicant, prior to building permit submittal, shall provide landscape and irrigation plans indicating the type, size and location of planted material, water usage calculations and irrigation plans. The Director of Community Development or his designee(s) will review and approve all landscape and irrigation plans. A Landscape Maintenance Agreement form shall be signed and executed prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. The applicant shall provide trash/recycling enclosures for the project which meet the size requirements established in the City of Ceres Water Efficient Guidelines and Standards. The enclosures shall have six-foot masonry wall with screening gates in front that match the building field color. In visible locations, the enclosures may be required to have stucco siding and provide landscape screening such as climbing vines or bushes to the discretion of the Director of Community Development. 12. All signage shall be consistent with the standards and guidelines established in Section of the City of Ceres Municipal Code. The placement and installation of said signs shall comply with both zoning and building codes in place at time of approval. 13. The applicant shall comply with the visibility obstructions at public intersections provisions in Chapter of the City of Ceres Municipal Code. 14. During the construction phase, the applicant shall ensure temporary outdoor storage of items will be screened with a fence or wall, as required. Depending on use, fences, or walls shall not exceed eight-feet in height including security measures unless required for Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 15

35 environmental mitigation or approved of the Planning Commission or City Council. 15. The applicant and/or outside party have the right to appeal, within 10-days, any decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council per the provisions of Chapter of the Ceres Municipal Code. Engineering Services Department 1. The applicant shall submit to the City of Ceres for review and approval, a grading and drainage plan prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer; shall obtain a grading permit; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing completion. The plan shall illustrate how the site will drain and include calculations and a drainage system to keep all drainage on-site. The applicant shall demonstrate that surface water runoff from the proposed development, including new drive way and parking areas, is conveyed to on-site stormwater retention facilities and that the facilities are adequately sized for the proposed changes during a 50-year storm event. 2. The applicant shall submit improvement plans that show the dedication and improvement of Hatch Road. The improvement plans must also detail all of the appropriate on-site improvements including water, sewer, storm drain, right-of-way improvement and dedication of public utility easements (PUE). If public utility lines are proposed through the site, then those facilities would also need to be included in the PUE to the review and approval of the Engineering Services Department. 3. The applicant shall comply with the State Water Regional Control Board Stormwater Best Management Practices during construction. The applicant shall obtain coverage under the statewide NPDES General Construction permit and shall prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and fee to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and have both on-site for reference and inspection. The project shall also be designed to incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) design parameters. This shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department. Furthermore, to obtain a building permit, a copy of the SWPPP and NOI shall be submitted to the Building Division when building plans are submitted. Payment of a fee (based on acreage) is required to obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 16

36 4. The applicant shall provide three (3) separate water related service lines, including fire service, domestic service, and irrigation service. 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a soils report is required for the project. The applicant shall submit to the City of Ceres for review and approval, a detailed soils report certified by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California and qualified to perform soils work. The soils report shall comply with the requirements of the current edition of the California Building Code. The soils report shall include a minimum of geotechnical investigation with regard to liquefaction, expansive soils, and seismic safety, and provide design parameters for proposed building foundation, soil preparation, and specifications and recommendations for pavement sections including loading areas and fire lanes. The grading plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the approved soils report. 6. Prior to any work being conducted within the City right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City. Prior to issuance of the Encroachment Permit, the applicant shall submit to the City of Ceres for review and approval, improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer; shall enter into an agreement with the City of Ceres to complete the improvements; and shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing the construction of the improvements. The improvements shall include replacement of damaged concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, and installation of street lights, striping and signing, paving, and any necessary transitions in accordance with the City of Ceres Procedures, Standard Specifications and Standard Details. 7. The driveway entrance shall conform to the City of Ceres improvement standards for commercial driveways. The driveway is considered to be a private road in form and function. Signage and striping shall be installed on the site at the intersection of the drive and Hatch Road to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department. 8. The applicant shall provide traffic control plans, prepared by a registered civil engineer, for all proposed work within the right-ofway and for all work that may impede or affect traffic in Hatch Road. 9. The applicant shall indicate, in writing to the City, the disposition of any water well(s) and any other water that may exist within the site. If any wells are proposed to be abandoned, or if they are Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 17

37 abandoned and have not been properly sealed, they must be destroyed per County of Stanislaus requirements. 10. The applicant shall submit design calculations for the proposed property line reinforced masonry walls that are based on recommendations of the project soils report that provide for seismic and wind protection. 11. The project soils engineer shall submit a soils certification prior to placement of building foundations and pavement. 12. The applicant shall submit pavement design sections to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval prior to placement of pavement. 13. All improvements shall be constructed in accordance with City standards and to the satisfaction of the Engineering Services Department. 14. All haul routes shall be approved by the City Engineer. Haul routes shall be limited to graded area only. 15. The applicant shall post sufficient surety guaranteeing completion of all improvements which revert to the City (i.e., landscaping, sidewalks, signing and striping, etc.). 16. The applicant shall comply with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District regulations for the construction phase of this project. DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY: 17. If any hazardous waste is encountered during the construction of this project, then all work shall be immediately stopped and the Stanislaus County Environmental Health Department, the Fire Department, the Police Department, and the City Inspector shall be notified immediately. Work shall not proceed until clearance has been issued by all of these agencies. 18. Prior to final preparation of the subgrade and placement of base materials, all underground utilities shall be installed and service connections stubbed out behind the sidewalk. Public utilities, cable TV, sanitary sewers, and water lines, shall be installed in a manner which will not disturb the street pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk, when future service connections or extensions are made. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 18

38 19. The developer shall keep adjoining public streets free and clean of project dirt, mud, materials, and debris during the construction period, as is found necessary by the Engineering Services Department. 20. If grading is to take place between October 1 and May 1, both temporary and permanent erosion control plans shall be submitted for review and approval along with the grading plan. Permanent erosion control measures shall include hydro-seeding of all graded slopes within 60-days of completion of grading. 21. The developer shall keep Hatch Road free and clean of project dirt, mud, materials, and debris during the construction period, as is found necessary by the Engineering Services Department. 22. Where soil or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the soil and/or geologic investigation report, or where such conditions warrant changes to the recommendations contained in the original soil investigation, a revised soil or geologic report shall be submitted for approval by the Engineering Services Department. 23. Prior to placing the final lift of asphalt, all public sanitary sewer lines shall be video inspected at the expense of the contractor/developer. All video tapes shall be submitted to the City. If any inadequacies are found, they shall be repaired prior to the placement of the final lift of asphalt. 24. Sufficient surety guaranteeing the public improvements for a period of one year shall be provided. 25. If there are substantial changes in the size, alignment, grades, etc. during construction, then original "as-built" plans on the standard size sheets will be certified by the Project Civil Engineer and returned to the City Engineering Services Department s office. Building Division 1. The applicant shall list all color and materials on the construction drawings when submitted to the City s Building Division. 2. Approval of this project is not an authorization to commence construction. Building construction, alterations, repairs, sign erection, or occupancy shall not be permitted without prior approval of the Building Division through issuance of any required permits. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 19

39 3. All construction shall meet the requirements of the currently adopted California Building Code, and disability accessibility as approved by the Building Division. 4. Handicapped accessibility to the proposed building shall be required per State Law and to the approval of the Building official. 5. Disabled parking stalls shall have a dimension of 17 x 19 with the access area on the passenger side. 6. The applicant shall provide on-site restroom facilities during construction. Fire Division The applicant shall comply with all of the requirements imposed by the City of Ceres Emergency Services Division, including, but not limited to the following: 1. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the City of Ceres Building Division and City of Ceres Ordinance , as amended pertaining to the Uniform Fire Code and Ordinance , as amended, pertaining to Automatic sprinklers. 2. On and off-site fire hydrants are required and shall be spaced 300 feet apart, with one within 50 feet of the Fire Department Connection for the Automatic Fire Sprinkler System. The Fire Department Connection for the automatic fire sprinkler system shall be located per Fire Department specifications, and hydrants shall be connected to a minimum main size of 8 inches for a dead-end hydrant and 6 inches for a looped system. Fire hydrants shall be Rich 960 or equal. 3. A fire hydrant shall be located within 50 feet of the Fire Department Connection, on the same side of the roadway. The location shall be approved by the Ceres Fire Department. 4. Fire hydrant locations shall be marked by the placement of Blue reflective markers in accordance with the Ceres Fire Department hydrant marking policy. 5. Turning radius for emergency vehicle access shall be a minimum of 50 feet on the outside radius and shall not be obstructed. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 20

40 6. As the facility is more than 5,000 square feet in size, it shall be provided with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. It shall be 24-hour monitored by the above listed monitoring company. It shall include water flow, trouble and tamper alarms. 7. The automatic fire sprinkler system shall include a Post Indicator valve, approved backflow devices and a Fire Department Connection. They shall be placed at a location approved by the Ceres Fire Department. The Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall be provided with locking Knox type caps. 8. The facility shall be provided with an approved automatic fire alarm system. It shall include monitoring by a 24-hour U.L. listed monitoring station. The system shall include manual pull stations, horn/strobe devices, smoke detectors and shall also monitor the automatic fire sprinkler system. 9. The fire alarm system shall be provided with an annuniciator panel in the foyer. 10. A Knox Box shall be provided and installed at a location specified per the Ceres Fire Department. 11. A Fire Lane No Parking shall be established as shown on the plans. It shall be labeled and marked per the Ceres Fire Department Fire Lane policy. 12. A minimum of 48-hour notice required for inspections. 13. Fire main layout shall be reviewed and approved by the Ceres Emergency Services. All water systems shall be looped when supplying more than one hydrant. 14. All Emergency Vehicle Access points and proposed utilities shall ensure cross-easements and shall be located per the proposed development plans unless modified by these conditions. 15. All Emergency Vehicle Access s shall be constructed of an all weather material approved by the Ceres Emergency Services. 16. The applicant shall provide on-site security lighting to the satisfaction of the Emergency Services Division. 17. A kitchen fire suppression system is required for hood, duct, and cooking appliances. Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 21

41 18. A vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches shall be maintained (i.e. porte cochere) to allow fire trucks unrestricted access. Police Division 1. The proposed use shall conform to the provisions of the Public Peace, Safety and Morals section of the Ceres Municipal Code. I:\PLANNING\DEPT\PLANNING\PC\Resolutions\2018\Reso (17-01 CUP Time Extension; 175-bed Rehab & Nursing facility).doc Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 22

42 Planning Commission Meeting - December 3, 2018 Agenda Item 3 - Page 23