Adopted August 13, 2014

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING

OF THE LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION

June 11, 2014

ROLL CALL: Commissioner Federico Cioni

Commissioner Allan Clark - absent

Commissioner Ron Fink

Commissioner Mary Leach

Commissioner Jack Rodenhi

STAFF: Planning Manager Lucille Breese

Assistant Planner Cory Hanh

Assistant City Attorney Brandon Ward

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

Alan Holland, representing Toyota of Lompoc addressed the Commission regarding potential

changes in zoning in the Old Town for automobile sales, he presented a petition of support for the

concept. Chair Fink thanked Mr. Holland for his comments and advised him the Zoning Ordinance

will be considered following adoption of Phase 2 of the 2030 General Plan in 2015.

CONSENT CALENDAR: - None

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:

1- CUP 12-04 - Review of Issues Relating to Conditional Use Permit

Continued from May 14, 2014 meeting

Planning Commission review of issues relating to Conditional Use Permit (CUP 12-04)

issued February 13, 2012, for operation of a CrossFit gym located at 1251 West Laurel

Avenue, Units 32 to 37 in the Industrial (I) Zoning District (Assessor Parcel Numbers: 89-

510-32 to 37). This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Commissioner Fink announced the Planning Commission had requested an investigation be

performed by staff regarding alleged noise concerns from the CrossFit facility and stated the hearing will be focused on the topic.

Planning Manager Lucille Breese summarized the written staff report; indicated supplemental

information had been received from an attorney representing the Rasmussen's; advised the

Commission an independent noise analysis had been conducted by a professional consultant

providing a determination the noise from the gym facility was within the City standards; and advised

that Captain Ed Lardner was present to discuss Police Department responses. Captain Lardner

provided details of reports received and actions taken since the last Planning Commission meeting. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING

James Rasmussen, 1327 Crown Circle - requested a continuance of the hearing to allow him to

perform an independent noise analysis; stated following placement of the City authorized noise

monitoring equipment, the gym found out about the study since it was quite for the following seven

(7) days; indicated he had been told not to continue calling the Police Department with complaints;

noted methods he felt would insure a more quiet operation of the gym; indicated both the Mayor and

the Building Official had witnessed the noise from the gym; indicated the gym had not followed the

Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Conditions of Approval (COA) since a second bathroom had not yet

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13,2014

June 11.2014 Page 2

been installed in the building as required; provided a handout to the Commission including copies of

police reports; and noted his house was built before the gym began operating but he received no notice of the hearings.

Mr. Rasmussen was advised by Chair Fink and Assistant City Attorney Ward to focus on the issue

at hand and if he felt there were other issues to investigate he should file a complaint regarding them.

Mr. Rasmussen continued - he noted the gym received a CUP two (2) years after the house

received a Certificate of Occupancy; stated officers who came to take reports felt disturbance and

agreed it could be attributed to the gym; advised CrossFit gym owners in other locations have had

difficulties with noise issues; and asked for a continuance to present more evidence.

Jeremy Ball, member of the Economic Development Committee and CrossFit member- noted the

City had spent taxpayer money on the independent analysis and CrossFit was not aware of the fact

during the test period nor did they make any changes to their activity levels; expressed concern that

Mr. Linn was on the record stating the gym would be moved; and noted Mr. Savella had attempted

to mitigate the noise by investing in appropriate equipment.

Sylvia King, CrossFit member - Recounted an event when she was at CrossFit having a private

lesson and the Police were called for a noise violation and indicated her belief more landscaping

should be place to help mitigate any noise.

Thomas E. Shuck, Attorney for West Pointe Homes - addressed the key points in his letter to the

Planning Commission; stated adequate consideration was not given to mitigate noise from the gym;

and the CUP is invalid.

Chair Fink asked if Mr. Shuck had read the Noise Analysis and Mr. Shuck indicated he had not and

did not dispute readings.

Mr. Ward advised Mr. Shuck the CUP was approved in 2012; no appeal was made to the City

Council; no writ of mandate was filed; therefore, the CUP is valid and vested. He reiterated the

Planning Commission had given staff specific direction regarding investigation of the noise

complaints, the staff presented the results of the investigation, and the Planning Commission was

considering the evidence prior to making a determination.

Mr. Shuck continued - expressed his concern for future tenants because a portion of the house

was not usable; asked for time to consider alternatives; and stated the City could look for another

location for the gym.

Commissioner Rodenhi inquired how Mr. Shuck would use extra time if it were granted.

Mr. Shuck responded Mr. Rasmussen would be willing to pay for a more reliable study to support the

long term goal of moving the gym.

Jeanne Rasmussen - expressed her frustration that no one would listen to her tape of the noise

from the gym; stated she is building homes in the community and is concerned with her buyers; and

noted neither the Commission nor the staff is on her side.

Chair Fink noted the point of the hearing is to consider the result of the investigation; stated the

Commission deals in factual information; and indicated the noise standard in the City Code is set

and the analysis measured by calibrated equipment and produced results; and he agreed there

would be noise and vibration occurring.

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13,2014

June 11,2014 Page 3

Caitlin Coyle, part-owner of CrossFit Gym - stated they had no idea the sound study was being

conducted; stated it coincided with the week of CrossFit Nationals which is normally one of the

loudest weeks; expressed her belief the house is poorly located; and asked at what point complaints become harassment.

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING

Chair Fink stated there were a number of serious allegations made in Mr. Shuck's letter which he

intended to address. The first issue was regarding a flawed Noise Analysis and he asked staff to explain the experience of the firm the City contracted with.

Planning Manager Breese responded, the firm had over 30 years experience, over 300 employees,

and the City had utilized them in other like studies; the firm worked within the parameters provided

by staff based upon adopted City regulations; the time was randomly selected; staff was confident in

presenting the report for consideration; and felt a professional analysis would be more objective than

a staff member taking readings.

Chair Fink agreed the staff had selected a reputable environmental firm who performed these types

of studies on a regular basis; and noted if the Rasmussen's were to perform a similar study they

would have to employ a similar type of firm and probably wind up with the similar results.

Mr. Shuck noted they would capture sound in a more reliable way and indicated seven (7) days

when they curtailed the activities created a flawed result.

Chair Fink noted the Commission received testimony the gym was unaware of the study period. He

noted the original developer of the project had received approval for both industrial and residential

uses to be constructed.

Mr. Shuck indicated the particular gym use was a problem.

Chair Fink said the letter indicated Building Official Sarah Roane was out on an inspection and saw

cracking in the wall that could be attributed to the gym use.

Building Official Sarah Roane spoke to the Commission and advised she had been out on the site

and witnessed some cracks in the wall but could not comment on the cause without a structural

analysis.

Chair Fink noted the letter indicated the Mayor visited the home and attributed specific comments to

the Mayor. Mr. Rasmussen agreed the Mayor may not have used the exact words in the letter and

recently the Mayor had advised him not to ask for a continuance just to file a complaint.

Chair Fink asked Attorney Ward what weight the Commission could give the alleged comments by

the Mayor. Mr. Ward stated since the person in question was not present and the letter had been

submitted so late in the process, it put the Commission in a difficult position.

Commissioner Cioni noted there was no substantiation of the Mayor's comments; the Commission

was not taking sides but making a determination based on facts presented; saw no evidence the

gym was aware of the noise study being conducted; expressed the understanding the noise is

sporadic but when viewed by the City Standard CNEL weighted average there is no evidence of the

City Code being violated.

Commissioner Leach had hoped the parties would work out the problem during the time since the

first Commission meeting; had expressed concern with zoning at the last meeting; noted the

Commission had approved the CUP in good faith without being aware of the severity of activity; the

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13, 2014

June 11,2014 __ Page 4

business moved-in in good faith because they applied for and were granted a CUP; noted belief

there being a problem; house should not have been so close to industrial as any industrial use could

potentially be loud and the industrial property owner has the right to lease the property to any

industrial user; and expressed her opinion that a compromise should be worked out as a win/win for

both parties.

Commissioner Rodenhi noted there was objective evidence regarding noise presented as a result of

the investigation; expressed belief combination of noise and vibration is a concern; acknowledged

the second hand comments from a police officer; and had hoped Mr. Shuck would propose some

way to measure noise and vibration.

Mr. Rasmussen asked for a 45-day continuance.

Chair Fink responded the Planning Commission relies on fact, they are not a political body; he

cannot support continuance; analysis was performed by a qualified consultant; and noted the

sporadic noise may be annoying but the findings in the Resolution are substantiated by facts.

MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Fink, seconded by Commissioner Cioni to

accept the materials presented and take no further action to modify CUP 12-

04.

VOTE: The motion passed on a 3-1-1 roll call vote with Commissioner Rodenhi

voting no and Commissioner Clark absent

Planning Manager Lucille Breese explained the appeal process to the audience.

The Commission took a five (5) minute break at 8:00 pm.

Chair Fink called the meeting to order at 8:05 pm.

2. FEIR 02-01 /SP 04-01 - Request for Finding of Alternative Mitigation and Review of

Addendum to Final Environmental Impact Report

Continued from May 14, 2014 meeting

A request by Michael Towbes, representing Harris Grade Partners, L.P.; Patrick J. McCarthy

and Bridget M. McCarthy; Donald M. Jensen and Lynn D. Gray; Lompoc Ranch Joint Venture;

Joe A. Signorelli, Jr.; Adam Peter Signorelli; Gus Thomas Signorelli; and The Towbes Group,

Inc. for Planning Commission consideration of an alternative mitigation for Mitigation Measure

TRANS 1.2c. adopted with the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR 02-01) prepared and

certified for the Burton Ranch Specific Plan (BRSP) area and Amendment No. 2 to the BRSP.

The project site is located at the intersection of State Highway Route 1, Purisima Road, and

Harris Grade Road.

The Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council based on newly

updated traffic information. An Addendum to FEIR 02-01, pursuant to the requirements of the

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has been prepared and will be considered.

(Assessor Parcel No. 97-250-002, -005, -040,-050, -051, -062, and -069).

Planning Manager Lucille Breese summarized the written staff report; noted Supplemental

Information was presented in the form of a letter of support from Mr. Jon Martin; and advised Mike

Luther, Assistant Public Works Director /City Engineer, was also present to answer any questions.

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13, 2014

June 11,2014 Page 5

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING

Craig Zimmerman, President, The Towbes Group - noted it was their attempt to work with CalTrans

on public improvement plans for the intersection that lead them to the request; thanked staff for

working to find a solution; and noted Mr. Derek Rapp, Penfield & Smith, had prepared the Traffic

Analysis and was available for any questions.

Mary Ellen Brooks, representing Citizens Planning Association - had been following Burton Ranch

for some time to consider impacts on residents in unincorporated area; felt the Level of Service C

was a fair evaluation; expressed concern with the elimination of the second south bound lane;

suggested additional egress points from the BRSP area and possibly a traffic signal at Onstott; also

suggested a Supplemental EIR to access the current water situation in the State.

Mr. Rapp addressed the technical concerns of the traffic analysis; indicated the trip distribution was

identical to the original EIR design; and noted when preparing the study the full build out of the 2030 GP was utilized.

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING

Chair Fink asked if the Allan Hancock College Public Safety Center and any future Space Center

development was considered in the traffic study? Mr. Rapp responded the Traffic Study included all

of the assumptions that were contained with the 2030 General Plan.

Commissioner Leach asked if it included the Summit View Homes project. Ms. Breese responded

Summit View Homes was included but not the Space Center since there is no proposal for a project.

Commissioner Leach asked for clarification of what the alternative mitigation actually will mean?

There is no difference from what there is now exists today except for a dedicated left turn lane? Mr.

Rapp responded there will be additional traffic signal modifications, protected left turn phasing, ad

protective, permissive left turn phasing (green arrow only and green light left turning).

Commissioner Rodenhi noted this was a highly technical issue which appeared to be well analyzed

with a LOS the same with the approved Mitigation Measure (MM) or the Alternative.

Chair Fink asked about Figure 2.1 in the study. City Engineer Mike Luther responded the developer

will need to complete the other traffic MM identified in the FEIR, the current request is addressing

only one improvement on the frontage. Mr. Rapp agreed the other improvements would be made

but were not currently designed.

MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Fink, seconded by Commissioner Cioni, that

the Commission adopt Resolution No. 771 (14) recommending City Council

adoption of the Alternative Mitigation, amendment to the BRSP, and adoption

of the Addendum prepared for the project, based upon the findings of fact in

the Resolution.

VOTE: The motion passed on a 4-0-1 voice vote, with Commissioner Clark absent

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13,2014

June 11.2014 Page 6

3. PR 14-03 - Amendment to Existing Sign Program

A request by Lisa Whitman of Flower Valley Plaza, LLC, the project applicant, for Planning

Commission review and consideration of amendments to an approved sign program (DR 85-

01). The proposed amendments apply to the number and type of on-building and monument

signs for tenants of the shopping center located in the Planned Commercial Development

(PCD) Zoning District at 1129,1133,1137,1145, and 1153 North H Street (APN: 089-011-

016, -017, -018, -019, and -020). This action is exempt pursuant to the California

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Assistant Planner Cory Hanh summarized the written staff report.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING

Lisa Whitman, member of the management team for Flower Valley Plaza (FVP) - noted the owner

intends to improve signage to attract business for the tenants. She is available to answer questions.

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING

Commissioner Cioni applauds efforts to change signs; supports effort for signs to be professionally

designed and attractive; noted proposed monument signs could be more aesthetically pleasing.

Commissioner Leach expressed concern; noted monument signs typically for major tenants

although the Commission has accepted some minor tenants, however 12 tenants on the sign is

excessive and she cannot support the request; suggested applicant return with redesign for

monument; expressed concern with signs at rear of building, they are OK on the west but not facing

the hotel, will confuse people; indicated sign facing H Street with name of center is unnecessary.

Ms Whitman stated the sign on H Street is intended to attract customers of the hotel across the

street to the FVP and she requested 12 tenants be allowed on the monument since there are no

anchor tenants in the center the owner is attempting to give all the tenants signage on H Street.

She noted Carrows and Burger King are independent and have their own monument signs on H

Street.

Commissioner Fink noted concern with the monument; stated he can support sign at rear since it will

aid in deliveries, etc.

Commissioner Rodenhi noted 12 tenant signs on the monument would be visual clutter and

expressed support for tall monument at the west Barton driveway.

The Commission further discussed the number of tenants in the FVP; the number of signs per

tenant - proposed and existing; the proposed monument sign facing H Street; the signs in the rear

of the building; and directed staff to work with the applicant to return with a revised proposal.

MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Fink, seconded by Commissioner Rodenhi, that the

Commission continue the hearing to allow the applicant time to address the

Commission comments.

VOTE: The motion passed on a 4-0-1 voice vote with Commissioner Clark absent.

Planning Commission Minutes Adopted August 13,2014 June 11, 2014 Page 7

4. PR 14-04 - Amendment to Existing Sign Program

A request by Jane Behr, the property owner of the Northside Shopping Center, for Planning

Commission review and consideration of amendments to an approved sign program (DR12-

11). The proposed amendments consist of changing the type of on-building signs for

tenants of the shopping center located in the Planned Commercial Development (PCD)

Zoning District at 1002 North H Street (APN: 087-011-013). This action is exempt pursuant

to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Assistant Planner Cory Hanh summarized the staff report.

Commissioner Rodenhi asked if cabinet signs will be allowed. Mr. Hanh responded they would be.

OPEN PUBLIC HEARING

Jane Behr, property manager and part owner of the Northside Shopping Center - noted currently

the Center has old, large cabinet signs which are an eyesore and channel letters are expensive,

they are attempting to modernize the appearance of the center.

CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING

Commissioner Cioni noted large cabinet signs are unattractive and he has no problem with grouped

letters with energy saving LED bulbs, he can also support the retention of the marquis sign until a

final tenant has been identified.

Commissioner Leach noted the addition of a second line of text.

Chair Fink stated this was consistent with previous approvals.

Commissioner Rodenhi congratulated Ms. Behr for moving to LED which would be more efficient

and reliable.

MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Leach, seconded by Commissioner Rodenhi, that

the Commission adopt Resolution No. 775 (14) based upon the findings of fact in the

Resolution.

VOTE: The motion passed on a 4-0-1 voice vote with Commissioner Clark absent.

NEW BUSINESS - None

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

MOTION: It was moved by Commissioner Fink, seconded by Commissioner Rodenhi

that the Commission approve the minutes of the May 14, 2014 meeting as

presented.

VOTE: The motion passed on a voice vote of 3-0-1-1 with Commissioner Leach

abstaining and Commissioner Clark absent.