Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-04_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, February 24, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: George Webber, Chair James Macdonald, Vice-Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Caroline Laymon, Commissioner Gary Miller, Commissioner Thomas Osborne, Commissioner Paul Thompson, Commissioner ABSENT: ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director John Jaquess, Assistant Director Leslie E. Murad II, Assistant City Attorney Asher Hartel, Senior Planner Richard Malacoff, Associate Planner Manuel Baeza, Associate Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Chairman Webber called the meeting to order at 2:35 p.m. All commissioners were present. Chairman Webber gave a brief recap on the history of the L.A. Fitness project which was approved by the Planning Commission three years prior. Chairman Webber stated since the project site was populated with mature Canary Island Pines and Deodora cedar trees, the Planning Commission reached a compromise with the developer and L. A. Fitness to allow the project to proceed, and retain the mature trees onsite. Chairman Webber stated that the trees on Marshall and Parkford were to remain in place. Chairman Webber stated the project was approved, and the developer began grading on the site. Chairman Webber continued by saying that Commissioner Macdonald discovered that many of the trees had been cut down. Commissioner Macdonald stated that the trees were cut down in July and August of 2003. At that time, both Commissioner Macdonald and Chairman Webber along with the developer and City staff formed a committee to resolve the matter. Commissioner Macdonald stated that they came up with a plan to revise the landscape plan to make up for the trees that were cut down. Commissioner Macdonald stated they went into the canyon and picked out twelve (12) trees to be planted at the site along with 30-40 additional trees to correct the situation. Commissioner Macdonald stated approximately 2-3 weeks ago, he noticed that the trees that were to be retained at the front of L.A. Fitness had been graded three(3)feet below the root ball, leaving the roots exposed. Commissioner Macdonald continued by saying at that time the general contractor and the landscape contractor approached City staff with a request to make six (6) changes to the landscape plan that was agreed upon. Commissioner Macdonald stated that one of the changes they requested was to remove the two(2)sixty foot tall trees in front of the L.A. Fitness building because they felt that they could not be saved. Commissioner Macdonald stated the Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Pagel reason they couldn't be saved was because the roots had been cut and exposed for approximately three weeks. Commissioner Macdonald stated they sat down and worked out an agreement regarding the six changes they requested, however the following day, one of the trees fell down because it had no support. Commissioner Webber stated the landscape contractor commenced with building a planter around the second tree, but the second tree fell down before the planter was completed. Commissioner Macdonald stated that he and Chairman Webber worked closely with the applicant and the landscape contractor to restore the two trees and to make changes to the original plans agreed upon last fall. Commissioner Macdonald stated the applicant is planting two tall trees in front of the L. A. Fitness building and trees along the perimeter of the site. Chairman Webber noted that the applicant violated the Conditional Use Permit by eliminating the trees,which opened up an opportunity for the Planning Commission to discuss the landscape plan. Chairman Webber stated that he, Commissioner Macdonald,Jeff Shaw,and John Jaquess came up with a landscape plan that was far above what was originally approved for the site. Chairman Webber stated the applicant agreed with the plan. Chairman Webber stated he feels it will be a very nice project when completed. II. CONSENT ITEMS - NONE III. OLD BUSINESS - NONE IV. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Laymon advised the Commission that she had an appointment in Hemet at 4:00 p.m. and she would have to leave the meeting at 3:00 p.m. A. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 774 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration on a Commission Review and Approval for the construction of an 3,872 square foot medical office on a 14,980 square foot lot located at 317 Brookside Avenue (between Grant Street and Parkwood Drive)in the A-P,Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by Dr. Greg Grochowski. B. VARIANCE NO.674-PUBLIC HEARING forthe Planning Commission to consider Variance from Sections 18.168.030 (C) (4) and 18.164.270 (A)to allow vehicles to back into an alley and to waive the requirement for a block wall between the A-P, Administrative Professional and Office District and the adjoining R-2, Multiple Family Residential District for a proposed medical office located at 317 Brookside Avenue (between Grant Street and Parkwood Drive) in the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by Dr. Greg Grochowski. Mr. Richard Malacoff stated the applicant is working with staff and the Municipal Utilities Department on the location of a trash enclosure which may include minor modifications to the site plan and may redefine the variance. Mr. Malacoff requested the project be continued to the second meeting in March. MOTION Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 2 It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Miller,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 774 and Variance No. 674 to March 23, 2004. C. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 764 - PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Commission Review Approval for the construction of a 1,748 square foot office building on a 8,250 square foot parcel located at 224 Nordina Street in the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by RUSS HUSTON. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 811 - PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing house to a office building located at 226 Nordina Street on a 8,250 square foot parcel in the A- P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by JAMES BALLARD. E. VARIANCE NO.668-PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a Variance from Section18.164.270 (D) of the Redlands Municipal Code to allow a decrease in the required width of a drivewayfrom twenty-six(26)feet to fourteen (14) feet for two proposed offices located at 224-226 Nordina Street in the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by RUSS HUSTON AND JAMES BALLARD. F. VARIANCE NO.671 -PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission consideration of a Variance from Section 18.64.090 of the Redlands Municipal Code to allow a decrease in the required side ward setback from five (5) feet to two (2)feet for an office located at 226 Nordina Street in the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Request submitted by JAMES BALLARD. Mr. Malacoff gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Malacoff noted that staff is concerned with the architectural elevations and feels the building is not consistent with the architectural texture of the neighborhood. Mr. Malacoff stated given the character of the building, it is not currently worthy of historic designation, however it could be with architectural changes to the building. Mr. Malacoff requested the proposed project be continued to March 23rd so the applicant can work out issues relative to the landscape plan, visibility, trash enclosure location, a sign plan, and a lighting plan. Commissioner Macdonald asked if portable trash barrels could be used in place of the trash enclosure. Mr. Malacoff stated that City staff is working with the applicant to determine the type of trash container to be used. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Richard Hickey, representing the applicant, stated the current elevation, which is a Mission Spanish style would blend in with the surrounding Craftsman,Victorian, and wood frame structures. Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 3 Mr. Hickey stated the antique, hand-rubbed stucco finish would have the appearance of a well- maintained 70 or 80 year old building. Mr. Hickey stated the property owner favors the stucco Spanish style home, because he is fond of Bill Solberg's office which is located across the street from his business. Mr. Hickey stated he spoke with Lonny Young (Municipal Utilities)and GaryVan Dorst(Solid Waste) and they decided that each of the buildings will have five (5) ninety gallon roll-off carts; two (2)for refuse, two (2)for recycling, and one (1)for green waste. Mr. Hickey stated the site lighting would be similar to the pole standard that is seen downtown. Mr. Hickey requested conceptual approval from the Commission to move forward. Chairman Webber stated that the Commission was not in a position to give its approval, however it would share comments on the proposed project. Commissioner Laymon requested information on the north elevation. Commissioner Cook stated she felt the north elevation is very plain. Commissioner Cook stated that she did not feel the building has to be Victorian style, but she felt it should look historic. Commissioner Cook stated that she would like to see more color. Commissioner Osborne concurred with staffs comments, and stated he would like to decrease the back-up space and add more landscaping on the north and south side of the parking area. Commissioner Osborne stated he felt the proposed building should be the same style as the other homes in the neighborhood and match the historic architecture of the buildings on the street. Commissioner Macdonald concurred with staffs comments relative to landscaping. Commissioner Macdonald stated he did not care for the look of the building, but he felt it would be appropriate. Commissioner Macdonald stated that he did not see any reason why the proposed project could not go forward. Commissioner Laymon left the meeting at 3:15 p.m. Before leaving, she stated that she did not have a problem with the style of the building, as she does not want a homogenous look in the area. Commissioner Miller stated it is nice to have an eclectic mix of architecture, but he feels the site is unique because of its "campus"quality. Commissioner Miller stated it was disconcerting to see a departure in the architecture. Commissioner Miller stated he felt it was appropriate to take the other houses on the street into account and he recommended a bungalow style with a porch element, thickened columns, and a pitched roof, which he felt would be more compatible. Commissioner Thompson concurred with Commissioner Miller relative to architecture, and stated that he would prefer to see a landscape plan before approving it. Chairman Webber stated there is a mixture of architecture throughout the City, however there are areas in the city that are exclusively Craftsman or bungalow style houses. Chairman Webber stated that he does not support mission revival architecture invading an area that is primarily Craftsman or cottage architecture. Chairman Webber stated the landscaping plan should include mature trees, and there should be trees along the front and side areas. Chairman Webber asked the applicant if there would be a planter in the center of the parking area. Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 4 Mr. Hickey stated that he presented a minimalist landscaping plan knowing the two applicants would go above and beyond what the Commission wants. Mr. Hickey stated he agreed with the applicant in wanting to have a structure that is easy to maintain and in character with old style Redlands. Commissioner Miller stated he felt it was desirable to have barrels rather than having a trash truck pull into the driveway. Mr. Shaw noted one of the problems they have had with the project is receiving materials at a late stage,which does not allow staff sufficient time to review the plans prior to the Commission meeting. Mr. Shaw stated there is a time frame in which they have to act. Mr. Shaw stated the details of the landscape plan are weak and will need to be revised by a licensed architect or nurseryman. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Chairman Webber reopened the public hearing. Mr. Russ Huston stated he is the one who wants to build the beautiful Spanish style house while everyone wants him to build an ugly Victorian house. Mr. Huston stated the new Victorian houses that have been built in Redlands have turned out horribly. Mr. Huston stated his building will look like it was built in the 1920's. Commissioner Osborne stated the building should have a pitched roof which would be more appropriate. Mr. Huston stated he wants a beautiful Spanish style house that looks like it was built in the 1920's. Mr. Huston stated that he does not think he can build a Victorian style house that looks old. Commissioner Osborne stated they are not asking for the house to look old. Commissioner Macdonald stated he felt the Commission should consider the fervor and feel for what the applicant wants to accomplish rather than forcing upon the applicant a style that the Commission wants. Commissioner Cook concurred with Commissioner Macdonald. Commissioner Cook stated she would prefer to have a Spanish Mediterranean style structure that will blend in, rather than a funny looking Victorian. Commissioner Miller noted that no one on the Commission said they wanted a Victorian style. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No.764,Conditional Use Permit No. 811, Variance No. 668, and Variance No. 671 to March 23, 2004. Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 5 G. VARIANCE NO.673-PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Variance requests from Municipal Code Section 18.52.130.A,to allow a reduction in the required setback along Grove Street from twenty-five (25)feet to eight and three tenths (8.3)feet for an existing mobile home park located at 1251 E. Lugonia Avenue within the R-2 Multi-Family Residential Zone. Request Submitted by LUGONIA FOUNTAINS MOBILE HOME ESTATES. H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 172(Revision No.2)PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Conditional Use Permit to create eighteen (18) mobile home spaces and one common open space area on approximately 3.43 acres of vacant land located on the west side of grove street between Lugonia Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue and on the east side of an existing mobile home park , located at 1251 E. Lugonia Avenue within the R-2 Multi-Family Residential Zone. Request Submitted by LUGONIA FOUNTAINS MOBILE HOME ESTATES. Mr. Manuel Baeza gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pete Meulenberg, Manager, stated that he first came to City staff in October 2002. Since that time Mr. Meulenberg has had 52 meetings with Tuttle Engineering and City staff. Mr. Meulenberg stated that the project has been changed numerous times to fulfill City requirements and he felt the project is complete and it is time to move on. Commissioner Miller asked Mr. Meulenberg if he would have a problem placing the open space area where the entrance is located. Mr. Meulenberg stated they considered that option but the last lot has to be a detention pond so they were unable to do so. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Chairman Webber noted that the best thing he likes about the project is that it provides affordable lots for seniors. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Revision No. 2 to Conditional Use Permit No. 172 and Variance No. 673, and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination"in accordance with City guidelines. It is recommended that this project will not individually or cumulatively affect wildlife resources as defined in Section 711.2 of the California Fish and Game Code. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Revision No. 2 to Conditional Use Permit No. 172 and Variance No. 673. It is recommended that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 6 community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 673 subject to the following findings and attached Conditions of Approval: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or the intended use that do not apply generally to other properties or uses in the same vicinity and zone. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone district, but which is denied to the property in question. 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of others in the vicinity. 4. That the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Redlands. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Revision No.2 to Conditional Use Permit No. 172 subject to the following findings, submitted plans, and attached conditions of approval. 1. The use applied for at this location is conditionally permitted in the R-2, Multiple Family Residential district. 2. The proposed at this location is necessary and desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone. 3. The project site is sufficient in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, meets all development standards (with the exception of the variance) and other features required in order to adjust the use to those existing or permitted future uses on land in the neighborhood. 4. That the site relates to streets and highways properly designed and improved to carry the type of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. 5. The conditions for the proposed use are reasonably related to the use to address potential effects of the proposed use, and are necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare and the best interests of the neighborhood. Chairman Webber recessed the meeting at 3:55 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 7 Chairman Webber reconvened the meeting at 4:01 p.m. I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 35 (REVISION NO. 2) - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider Conditional Use Permit for a 2,408 square foot addition to an existing building for a proposed multipurpose room and offices on the grounds of the existing church located at 459 E. Highland Avenue in the R-S, Suburban Residential District. Request submitted by THE RIVER CHRISTIAN REFORMED CHURCH. Mr. Baeza stated during analysis of the project staff discovered a number of onsite issues relative to existing landscaping, and signage. Mr. Baeza stated staff concluded more time is needed to address the issues,therefore they are recommending the proposed project be continued to March 9, 2004. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Conditional Use Permit No. 35 (Revision No. 2) to March 9, 2004. Chairman Webber stated it is his belief, and the belief of other members, that the Residential Development Allocation (RDA)system is flawed, but will soon be reviewed and revised in the near future. Chairman Webber stated he is personally going to skew his opinions toward infill projects. J. RDA 2004-1-01 -A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 16174, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 68 lots on 30 acres generally located on the north side of Pioneer Avenue approximately 440 feet east of Occidental Drive. (Note: This request is for 5 allocations; a total of 63 allocations were previously awarded in the second, third, and fourth quarters of 2003.) Request submitted by CENTEX HOMES. Mr. Asher Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-1-01 which requested 5 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments has resulted in a total of 63 points. Chairman Webber stated that he wants all houses in future development projects to have the appropriate sideyard setbacks, not a majority of the houses. Chairman Webber indicated that he is going to look very closely at this, and projects that do no meet the setback requirement will not receive points from him. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 30 points, for a total of 93 points. K. RDA 2004-1-02-A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 15469, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 23 lots on 110 acres generally located south of the terminus of Sutherland Drive. (Note: This request is for 23 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by SILVERLEAF DEVELOPMENT 11, LLC. Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 8 Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-1-02 which requested 23 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 42 points. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 49 points, for a total of 91 points. L. RDA 2004-1-04-A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for ten (10)residential units on five(5) existing R-2 lots on 0.73 acres at the northeast corner of Colton Avenue and Herald Street. (Note:This request is for 10 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by THOMAS OVERTURF. Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-1-04 which requested 10 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 64 points. Mr. Tom Overturf, applicant, stated his project is an attempt to take a difficult site, in a low market area, and design a project that is easily built, of low cost construction. Mr. Overturf passed around a model of the proposed project. Mr. Overturf stated the elevations will have variations, with different roof lines colors, and materials. Mr. Overturf stated he is working with the Housing Commission to try to keep the project affordable. Mr. Overturf stated he hopes to sell the homes for $300k. Mr. Hartel stated the project has gone before the Housing Commission and there is the possibility that it may be awarded more points. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 33 points, for a total of 97 points. M. RDA 2004-1-05-A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 16359, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 43 lots on 14 acres generally located on the east side of Texas Street, north of PioneerAvenue. (Note:This request is for 43 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by KB HOMES. Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-1-04 which requested 43 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 49 points. Mr. Matt Denham, Ion Communities, thanked staff for its guidance. Mr. Denham stated that his project is entry level homes. Mr. Denham stated that KB Homes has 6 floor plans and 15 elevations within the 43 proposed homes. Mr. Denham stated that all homes will have shutter and window treatments, along with split face block walls on all side yards that face the pubic right of way as well as the perimeters, staggered setbacks, and curvilinear streets. Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr. Denham what he anticipated the selling price of the homes would be. Mr. Denham responded by saying the homes would be in the mid 300's. Commissioner Cook asked the applicant how he could expect the Commission to give him leniency Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 9 on the architecture when he will be selling the homes for$350k. Mr. Bud Thatcher,Thatcher Engineering, noted that the project was designed and graded to match the terrain. Mr. Thatcher asked the Commission to consider awarding the project 4 points for Site and Grading Design. Commissioner Cook stated that the architecture should reflect the fact that the developer will selling the homes for a fair high price. Commissioner Miller concurred with Commissioner Cook,and stated they have had high-density, modest income homes with excellent architecture. Commissioner Macdonald stated that 22 of the 43 houses have sideyard setbacks of less than 10 feet and 5 of the houses have setbacks of 5-6 feet. Commissioner Macdonald noted that they are two-story houses on small lots. Chairman Webber noted that he will be taking a closer look at new developments in the future specifically the sideyard setbacks. Commissioner Osborne stated he felt the Commission was penalizing the developer for the fact that they(Commission) changed their mind. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 41 points, for a total of 90 points. Mr. Overturf stated in the 30 years since the RDA process was implemented, no one has qualified for a moderate income house. Mr. Overturf stated he worked with the Housing Commission on his project and was told he would be given 15 points. Mr. Jaquess stated that the points were not included because they have not yet been received from the Housing Commission. Mr. Shaw noted that the additional points will be included in the City Council report. V. ADDENDA A. Report on Proposed School Site for County Superintendent of Schools on Pennsylvania Avenue East of Judson Street Mr. Jaquess stated that the school proposed for this site will house 26 severely handicapped students. Mr. Jaquess stated that the site is large enough to accommodate the school and will provide adequate setbacks from Judson Street, although street improvements will be needed. Mr. Jaquess stated that the site would require a General Plan Amendment to be consistent with the General Plan. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Osborne,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt staff's recommendation and make the following report to the County Superintendent of Schools: Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 10 1. The five acre site is physically suitable for a medical therapy unit to be developed by the County Superintendent of Schools for 26 students with special needs. 2. It will be compatible with the surrounding uses which will include an elementary school, a public park and very low density residential development. 3. The site is not currently consistent with the City General Plan and a General Plan Amendment to Public/Institutional will be required. 4. The Site is currently zoned A-1,Agriculture,which permits a school subject to a Conditional Use Permit to be approved by the City of Redlands. B. Report on Proposed School Site for County Superintendent of Schools on Northwest corner of Alabama Street and Park Avenue Mr. Jaquess stated that the proposed school site will accommodate 264-350 junior and senior high school students who have been expelled from regular schools. Mr. Jaquess stated if the site were to be approved, it would require a 6/7 vote from the Planning Commission as it would impact the intersection of Alabama and Redlands Boulevard. Mr. Jaquess stated that staff had concerns on the use of commercial and industrial property for other than commercial and industrial uses. Mr.Jaquess stated that Mr. David Reck,who is from the office of the County Superintendent of Schools,stated they prefer to house this kind of school away from residential areas. Chairman Webber noted that he has strong concerns that the use is not compatible on Alabama Street, which is very busy. Chairman Webber stated he could not support the project and he requested the wording on the motion #2 be revised to make a strong statement that the use is not compatible. Commissioner Thompson questioned allowing this project in the area of Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard when other developments have not been allowed. Commissioner Miller recommended the wording "is highly incompatible" be added and the addition of sentence #5 to read: It removes from use highly valuable property. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt staff's recommendation and make the following report to the County Superintendent of Schools: Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 11 1. The eight acre site is not physically suitable for a Community Day School to be developed by the County Superintendent of Schools. 2. The property is highly incompatible with the surrounding uses which will include commercial/industrial uses and a major traffic corridor in the City. 3. The site is not currently consistent with the City General Plan and a General Plan Amendment to Public/Institutional will be required. 4. The Site is currently zoned EV/IC, East Valley Corridor Specific Plan/Commercial Industrial, which permits a Community Day School subject to a Conditional Use Permit to be approved by the City of Redlands. 5. This would remove from use highly valuable property. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. January 27, 2004 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 5-0 vote (Commissioner Miller abstaining) that the Planning Commission approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 27, 2004. B. February 10, 2004 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 5-0 vote (Commissioner Miller abstaining) that the Planning Commission approve the Planning Commission minutes of February 10, 2004. VII. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS - None A. City Council Report Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council actions of February 17tH VIII. ADJOURNMENT TO MARCH 9, 2004 Chairman Webber adjourned the meeting to March 9t", at 6:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Ortiz, Senior Admin. Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 12 Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2004 Page 13