Loading...
2016/10/27 Planning Commission MinutesROHNERT PARK PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 27, 2016 The Planning Commission of the City of Rohnert Park met this date in a regular session commencing at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 130 Avram Avenue, with Commissioner Borba presiding. Call To Order Chairperson Borba called the meeting of the regular session to order at approximately 6:00 p.m. with Chairperson Borba leading the pledge. Roll Call Present: (5) Commissioners: Commissioner Adams, Commissioner Borba, Commissioner Blanquie, Commissioner Giudice and Commissioner Haydon were present. Community Development Director, Mary Grace Pawson, Planning Manager, Jeffrey Beiswenger, Technical Advisor, Norm Weisbrod and Recording Secretary, Sonia Espino were present. Declaration of None. Abstention Acknowledgement of Chairperson Borba acknowledged the posting of the Agenda of this meeting in Public Noticing three (3) public places, per the requirements of the Brown Act. Approval of Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Blanquie, seconded by Commissioner Giudice to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of October 13, 2016 as presented. The motion passed with a 5-0 vote. (AYES: Adams, Borba, Blanquie, Giudice, Haydon (AYES: 5 NOES: 0; ABSENT: 0) Unscheduled Public None. Appearances Conditional Use Technical Advisor Norm Weisbrod presented the staff report. He stated that this Permit/Site Plan and item was considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting of October 13, Architectural Review 2016. At that meeting the commission raised the following questions, concerns and comments: File No. PLSU2016-0001 • Concern was raised regarding security both inside and outside the facility. John Diemer/6100 The Commission suggested that security cameras be installed covering Commerce LLC the exterior of the property. Staff is recommending that security cameras be provided with the specific locations to be approved by Development Services and Public Safety. Staff contacted a representative of The Learning Experience (TLE) regarding security for access to the building. Staff learned that each parent is given an electronic key fob that opens the interior security to the building. The interior of the building is kept secure at all times and only parents and authorized personnel are allowed entry. Staff believes that these security measure satisfy concerns of the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Minutes October 27, 2016 • There were questions raised regarding fencing around the outdoor play area. The Planning Commission was concerned that someone from the Hinebaugh Creek path could potentially jump the fence and make contact with children in the play area. A representative from TLE said they have installed eight (8) foot high fences around the play area of other facilities they operate. They have also installed fences in a tan or beige color rather than white. Staff is recommending a condition that the fence along the creek path be eight (8) feet high with design details subject to staff approval. • The question was raised whether the design of the day care building conformed to the design standards in the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan (PDA). TLE complies with the design guidelines of the PDA's "triangle business area" which does not have the same urban design concerns of the mixed use City Center area that is located south of Hinebaugh Creek. • The Planning Commission expressed a concern regarding the design of the building. The proposed building does compare with several commercial buildings in the area. The area is a collection of several architectural styles and staff is believes that the design is consistent with the City's adopted design guidelines. • The Commission asked where a bus would park if children were picked up after school and brought to the day care center. The day care center does have a van that can be used to transport children when needed. It is small enough to fit in a standard parking space. The project has a surplus of parking and this will not impact the availability of required parking. • The Commission had concerns with some of the operational characteristics of TLE, but a representative was not available at the meeting to address these concerns. Staff contacted a representative of The Learning Experience and we have been assured that someone familiar with the operation of the day care center will be in attendance at tonite's meeting. Mr. Weisbrod concluded his report by recommending that the Planning Commission, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 2016-24 certifying the Mitigated Negative Declaration and further adopt Resolution No. 2016-25 approving the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and Architectural Review to allow a Day Care Facility at 6150 Commerce Boulevard, subject to the findings and conditions of approval. Chairperson Barba called for questions of staff. Questions included: • Commissioner Haydon - Asked if the roof material would allow for solar installation? Mr. Weisbrod responded that it is a standard composition shingle roof and would accommodate solar panel installation. Chairperson Borba invited the applicant to come forward. John Diemer, Evelyn Armstrong (regional manager) and Hector Vienes were recognized. Questions from the Planning Commission included: • Commissioner Giudice - Asked the applicant to speak to safety and security as well as drop off operations and concerns with regard to the Planning Commission Minutes October 27, 2016 proximity to the creek and the potential for a security guard. Also, Commissioner Giudice wanted information with regard to the curriculum and food service. Ms. Armstrong responded that the fencing proposed is an 8' vinyl fence that contains alarms at each entry point. A key fob is needed to gain entry into the front door as well as the secondary entry door. All of the doors leading in and out of the outdoor area also require fob activation. Children are never left unsupervised; and the stationing of a guard is not provided in any other school at this time. The curriculum is developmentally appropriate for all ages and addresses math, social development, arts and crafts, sign language and fitness. With regard to food service, Ms. Armstrong noted than an industrial kitchen is not installed. There is a warming pantry and pre-cooked meals are provided. Additionally there is storage for breast milk and all units are appropriately labeled. • Commissioner Blanquie — Questioned the handling of the children as young as 6 weeks old and the protocol for a lost fob. Additionally, Commissioner Blanquie asked the number of staff available on the site. Ms. Armstrong stated that infants have their own room and the outside is used by the toddler. Every fob comes with an identification number and two are generally issued to each family (mom & dad). The fobs are immediately deactivated as soon as notification of theft or loss thereof is made. There are access limitations (6:30 am to 6:30 pm) and there is activity reports that provide who/what time entry is made for each fob. Ms. Armstrong also noted that there is generally/approximately a staff of 28, and staffing depends on the demand; if there are more infants there are additional staff. There is a 4-1 ratio for children 6 weeks to 2 years. • Commissioner Adams — Asked what the significance of the 8 year old cut off age was and do the children ever go outside unattended? Commissioner Adams also addressed concern with safety issue in regards to a "warming pantry" rather than a kitchen and shared previous concern with the potential shared parking and safety issues given close proximity to the creek path which she is satisfied have been addressed as outlined in the staff report. Ms. Armstrong responded that the program is designed and targeted for "early childhood" development. Never at any time do the children exit the building unattended as a fob is needed to activate all exit doors. She also noted that pick up time is a time where connection with parents is initiated and clarified that given the proximity to the creek, there will be extra precautions taken. • Commissioner Haydon — Asked for an overview of the operation? Commissioner Haydon also wanted thoughts of the pros and cons of fencing materials, solid fencing versus open fencing and operational details for exterior gates. Commissioner Haydon mentioned that in an effort to educate herself she made a call to Kinder Care to inquire in this regard. Their preference was the open fencing; Commissioner Haydon indicated that she is somewhat opposed to the vinyl fencing and is torn with regard to this feature. Ms. Armstrong stated that the hours of operation are 6:30 am to 6:30 pm, with the majority of the children being there by 6:15. The facility is not opened on weekends and there is no evening care. She noted that there is emergency exits from the playground on the northeast side of the building and the gate is never used by anyone. There is panic hardware that goes out with an alarm when tampered with. Ms. Armstronq indicated that previously she had 3 Planning Commission Minutes October 27, 2016 worked for Kinder Care and gave a scenario whereby a gentlemen relieved himself at a location she worked with opening fencing. Most facilities end up putting a privacy protection because of issues such as this. She is a very big proponent of the vinyl as protection is number one and within the vinyl fence there is a sound protection barrier as well. Commissioner Haydon spoke with regard to the exterior elevation of the facility and asked if there were other alternatives with respect to the fagade and turf? Regarding the aesthetics, Commissioner Haydon offered that pull outs such as a bay window would give it more appeal. Ms. Armstrong responded that there is some natural ground but mostly it is a padded turf, synthetic grass. Commissioner Haydon asked how the synthetic turf was cleaned? Ms. Armstrong indicated that is cleaned but not chemically cleaned; water only. Commissioner Haydon asked if there was any consideration for the installation of solar? Mr. Armstrong noted that was great idea, but nothing in the package/application/budget allows for this. Commissioner Haydon felt this should be made a condition of approval. Community Development Director, Mary Grace Pawson was recognized and offered that this might be a challenge as we have not required across the board for any other application of this nature. The decision could be appealed. Commissioner Borba — Questioned if the incident with the gentlemen previously given was recorded? Would like the idea of cameras to have access to footage so that this type of activity could be handled appropriately. Commissioner Borba also commented that his preference would be wood fencing or other type of solid fencing due to aesthetics. He questioned the type of maintenance required for vinyl fencing? Ms. Armstrong stated that the incident was not recorded and there is no maintenance with the vinyl material. Ms. Pawson spoke to fences on private property as it relates to maintenance and code enforcement controls to ensure that they are properly maintained. Planning Manager, Jeff Beiswenger suggested that perhaps trees and/or additional landscaping could be required as well. Further discussion was held. Commissioner Adams asked what the staffing was for the proposed 185 children. Ms. Armstrong responded 24-35 adults. A question arose regarding the presence of any motion sensor cameras along the creek fence. Ms. Armstrong responded that definitely there will be cameras positioned at certain locations and could potentially make the creek side installation happen. Ms. Pawson indicated that staff would have to actively solicit Public Safety review if we condition this feature. Commissioner Borba opened the public hearing. There being no further comment, Commissioner Borba closed the public hearing. The Commission thanked the applicant for attending and appreciated the effort to alleviate the many concerns that were raised at the previous meeting. 4 Planning Commission Minutes October 27, 2016 OL , ( UL tjirperson 'Secret A motion was made by Commissioner Haydon, seconded by Commissioner Giudice to adopt Resolution No. 2016-24 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Learning Experience Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and Architectural Review. The motion passed with a 5-0 vote. (AYES: Adams, Borba, Blanquie, Giudice, Haydon (AYES: 5 NOES: 0; ABSENT: 0) A motioin was made by Commissioner Blanquie, seconded by Commissioner Adams to adopt Resolution No. 2016-25 approving a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and architectural Review for the Learning Experience Day Care Center at 6150 Commerce Boulevard modifying the resolution to incorporate additional landscaping along the creek side of the fence as approved by planning staff and extending the height of the fence to 8'. The motion passed with a 5-0 vote. (AYES: Adams, Borba, Blanquie, Giudice, Haydon (AYES: 5 NOES: 0; ABSENT: 0) Items from the Planning None. Commission Matters from Planning Mr. Beiswenger informed the Commission to contact staff if there was any Staff interest in attending the annual Sonoma State University Planning Conference. The city has monies in the budget to cover this. Also, he reminded the Commisdion to turn in their re -appointment application if interested in serving the next term. Adjournment There being no further business, Chairperson Borba adjourned the meeting at 7:40 pm. OL , ( UL tjirperson 'Secret