Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-25-04_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, May 25, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: George Webber, Chair James Macdonald, Vice-Chairman Caroline Laymon, Commissioner Gary Miller, Commissioner (Arrived at 4:12 p.m.) Paul Thompson, Commissioner ABSENT: Ruth Cook, Commissioner Thomas Osborne, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Les Murad III, Assistant City Attorney Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director John Jaquess, Assistant Director Robert Dalquest, Principal Planner/Project Manager Asher Hartel, Senior Planner Manuel Baeza, Associate Planner Alicia Heideman, Junior Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Webber called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. All commissioners were present except Commissioners Cook, Miller, and Osborne. Mr. David Waters (525 S. Wabash)expressed concern on the palm trees being planted on Wabash Avenue for the Centex project. Mr.Waters stated it was his understanding that the existing historic palm trees on Wabash Avenue were to be moved west of their current location. Mr. Waters stated many of the trees, which are dying, will be interspersed with magnolia trees along 5t" and 6t" Avenue. Chairman Webber requested that staff report back to the Commission with information on this matter. Mr. Jeff Shaw, Director, stated he would report back at the next meeting. Mr. Bill Cunningham stated at the last meeting, he initiated a discussion with regard to the 6/7 vote that is required for all projects south of Redlands Blvd. Mr. Cunningham distributed a copy of the circulation element section to the Commission and read from Sections 5.20b, 5.20c, and 5.20e. Chairman Webber stated the matter could not be discussed because it was not agendized. Chairman Webber asked staff to report back with information. Mr. Shaw stated he would report back at the next meeting. II. PRESENTATION ON THE STATUS OF REDLANDS BOULEVARD AND ALABAMA STREET IMPROVEMENTS - PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR RON MUTTER Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Pagel Mr. Ron Mutter gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the status of improvements on Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street. Mr. Mutter stated approximately one year ago the Planning Commission recommended the improvements be one of the top priorities the City undertake with the concurrence of the City Council. Staff was directed to proceed with a plan, which was slightly modified due to new information. Mr. Mutter stated the intersection of Redlands Boulevard and Alabama Street is projected to have a LOS E with continued development in the general area. Mr. Mutter stated six (6) lane arterial roadways and dual left turn lanes are planned for Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard. Mr. Mutter stated the traffic situation is compounded by Colton Avenue merging onto Redlands Boulevard and it is anticipated that elimination of the westbound merge movement onto Redlands Boulevard will alleviate the situation. Mr. Mutter stated a T-intersection will be established at Redlands Boulevard, approximately 1,000 feet east of Alabama Street. Mr. Mutter continued by saying a new traffic signal system and railroad crossing(with pre-emption)will be set up at the new intersection on Colton Avenue. Mr. Mutter stated there are two sources of revenue to complete the improvements; Measure I and Development Impact Fees. Mr. Mutter reviewed the schedule for current and future improvement projects. Chairman Webber asked Mr. Mutter to keep the Commission informed on the status of the improvements. Mr. Mutter stated he would be happy to do so. III. CONSENT ITEMS -NONE IV. OLD BUSINESS Chairman Webber stated the item would be heard later during the meeting,because the Commission did not have the six (6) Commissioners present that are required for final approval. C. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 782- Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to construct a two (2) story office/retail building with a floor area of 30,000 square feet located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane approximately 300 feet east of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. Request submitted by R.P. WAGES. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 2 V. NEW BUSINESS A. MINOR COMMISSION APPROVAL NO. 34 - Planning Commission to consider a Minor Commission Approval to allow a five (5) foot reduction in the required front yard setback from the required twenty-five (25) foot front yard, for a proposed single family residence located at 1212 Monterey Street in the R-S, Single Family Residential District. Request submitted by BRIAN AND JENNIFER CROSS. Ms. Alicia Heideman gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planni ng Comm ission approv e Minor Comm ission Appro val No. 34 subjec t to the followi ng finding s and attach ed Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 3 conditi ons of approv al: 1. That the proposed five (5) foot reduction of the required front yard setback meets the set criteria for a Minor Commission Approval (Section 18.196.130 of the Redlands Municipal Code) and is determined to be in the public interest and proper to accommodate the proposed residence; 2. That the reduction of the required front yard will not impact or be detrimental to the immediate uses or existing uses or uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed yard modification is to be located; 3. That the proposed reduction in the required front yard is necessary and desirable for the proper development of the project site and is in harmony with the goals and policies of the General Plan; and 4. That the conditions set forth in the permit and shown on the approved plans are necessary to protect the public health, safety, or general welfare. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 833 - A Public Hearing for the Planning Commission to consider a Conditional Use Permit for a medical clinic in the University Shopping Center located at 800 E Lugonia Avenue in the C-2, Neighborhood Convenience Center District. Request submitted by DOUG JACOBSON. Ms. Alicia Heideman gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Laymon, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 833 subject to the following findings, the submitted plans, attached Conditions of Approval and 1. That the proposed development does not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City. 2. That the proposed development does comply to the maximum extent feasible with the regulations of the City's General Plan,the applicable zoning district, and the City's development standards. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 4 3. 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. 4. That the proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location. 5. That the proposed use will not have a detrimental effect upon other businesses or nearby residential uses in the area. C. ZONE CHANGE NO. 402 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a Public Hearing for a Zone Change from unincorporated County of San Bernardino to a proposed zoning of R-1, Single Family Residential District for 4.89 acres located on the northwest corner of Mentone Boulevard (Highway 38) and Amethyst Street. Request submitted by DAVID HIGGINSON. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 818- Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 16,030 square foot religious institution on 4.89 acres located on the northwest corner of Mentone Boulevard (Highway 38) and Amethyst Street within the unincorporated area of the County of San Bernardino (proposed City of Redlands R-1, Single Family Residential District). Request submitted by DAVID HIGGINSON. Mr. Manuel Baeza stated a Defense and Indemnity Agreement is scheduled to come before the City Council on June 1St. The agreement would release the City from any liability related to development of the project. Mr. Baeza stated once the agreement is approved by the City Council, the project will be allowed to move forward. Mr. Baeza stated staff is recommending the project be continued to June 8, 2004. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Laymon, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Zone Change No. 402 and Conditional Use Permit No. 818 to the Planning Commission meeting of June 8, 2004. E. MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 270 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a Public Hearing for a Minor Subdivision (Parcel Map No. 16372) to subdivide approximately 8.22 gross acres into eight (8) commercial parcels located on the northwest corner of Citrus Avenue and Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 5 Iowa Street in the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by MKJ IOWA COMMERCE CENTER, LLC. F. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 772- Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio- Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to develop an industrial park to include eight buildings with a combined area of 118,260 square feet on an approximate 8.22 gross acre property located on the northwest corner of Citrus Avenue and Iowa Street in the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by MKJ IOWA COMMERCE CENTER, LLC. Mr. Baeza stated after the staff report was written, staff was informed by the Municipal Utilities Department that were still questions regarding how the project was going to connect to sewer lines. Mr. Baeza stated staff is recommending the project be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of June 22, 2004 to give the applicant enough time to resolve the sewer issue. Mr. Baeza stated he was prepared to a give a brief presentation on the proposed project so that it can be reviewed by the Commission and provide comments. Commissioner Macdonald asked if there has been any thought to using pastel colors to add diversity to the buildings. Mr. Baeza stated he did not believe so. Commissioner Laymon stated both she and Commissioner Miller noted at the last meeting that the roof lines on another project on Alabama had become extremely homogenous and they requested some sort of relief from a sea of flat, identically sized roofs. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated Commissioners Miller and Webber met with the applicant last week to discuss the issue and revise the plans. Chairman Webber complimented Mr. Baeza on his review of the landscape plan. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Gary Ryerson, RKZ Architects, stated he concurred with the Conditions of Approval however, he disagreed with the Fire Department requirement for three (3) fire hydrants. Mr. Ryerson stated he would resolve the issue with the Fire Department. Mr. Ryerson concurred with staff's recommendation for a continuance. Mr. Ryerson stated the parapet heights vary from 16 inches to two feet. Chairman Webber stated staff recommends the buildings parapets be staggered on all elevations and tile accents be increased. Mr. Ryerson stated he would work with staff. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 6 Chairman Webber asked if there was consensus from the Commission to have the applicant come back with revisions to the roof line, tile accents, and colors. Commissioner Macdonald requested consideration of building colors such as beige, light blue, or light green. Commissioner Laymon requested a less homogenous look on the buildings. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Minor Subdivision No. 270 and Commission Review and Approval No. 772 to the Planning Commission meeting of June 22, 2004. G. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 779- Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio- Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to develop an industrial park to include five buildings with a combined area of 271,093 square feet on an approximately 14.39 acres property located south of Almond Avenue and north of Lugonia Avenue generally west of Research Drive in Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. Chairman Webber requested items IV-G be delayed until later in the meeting to await the arrival of Commissioner Miller who would like to add some input. H. CONCEPT PLAN NO. 1 (AMENDMENT NO. 2) - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Public Hearing on an amendment to Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to: a) revise the Land Use Plan and designate approximately 134 acres north of Almond Avenue as Commercial Industrial and Warehouse Distribution District; b) revise Section III(C)of the Commercial Industrial and Warehouse Distribution District by adding special design standards for industrial buildings over 250,000 square feet in size; and c) revise Figure 7F concerning the landscape design along Mountain View Avenue. Concept Plan No. 1 encompasses 306 acres and is bounded by San Bernardino Avenue to the North, Lugonia Avenue to the south, California Street to the east, and Mountain View Avenue to the west. Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 7 I. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 781 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval for the construction of one (1) warehouse/distribution concrete tilt-up building of 683,269 square feet on approximately 31 acres located on the south side of San Bernardino Avenue, east side of Mountain View Avenue, and north side of Almond Avenue in Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. Mr. Jaquess suggested items IV-H and IV-1 be tabled pending the arrival of the Project Planner to the meeting. It was determined that items IV J, K, L, and M would be heard at this time. J. ZONE CHANGE NO. 394 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Public Hearing for a Zone Change from A-1, Agricultural District to R-E, Residential Estate District on three (3)contiguous parcels totaling 19.6 gross acres at 1205 E. San Bernardino Avenue, located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue approximately 2,000 feet west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by REGENCY FARMS, INC. K. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 102 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Public Hearing for an Agricultural Preserve Removal on 19.6 acres at 1205 E. San Bernardino Avenue, on property located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue approximately 2,000 feet west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request Submitted by REGENCY FARMS, INC. L. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.806- Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development (PRD) on 19.6 acres consisting of 52 residential lots and four (4) common lots at 1205 E. San Bernardino Avenue, located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue approximately 2,000 feet west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request Submitted by REGENCY FARMS, INC. M. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16747 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a Public Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 8 Hearing for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide approximately 19.6 gross acres into 52 residential lots and four (4) common lots at 1205 E. San Bernardino Avenue, located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue approximately 2,000 feet west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by REGENCY FARMS, INC. Mr. Jaquess stated approval of these items is subject to a Variance application that was filed but not advertised in time for it to be heard at today's meeting. Mr. Jaquess requested the proposed project be continued to June 8, 2004. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Zone Change No. 394, Agricultural Preserve Removal No. 102, Conditional Use Permit No. 806, and Tentative Tract No. 16747 to the Planning Commission meeting of June 8, 2004. Items IV-H and IV-1 which were tabled earlier in the meeting were heard at this time. H. CONCEPT PLAN NO. 1 (AMENDMENT NO. 2) - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Public Hearing on an amendment to Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to: a) revise the Land Use Plan and designate approximately 134 acres north of Almond Avenue as Commercial Industrial and Warehouse Distribution District; b) revise Section III(C)of the Commercial Industrial and Warehouse Distribution District by adding special design standards for industrial buildings over 250,000 square feet in size; and c) revise Figure 7F concerning the landscape design along Mountain View Avenue. Concept Plan No. 1 encompasses 306 acres and is bounded by San Bernardino Avenue to the North, Lugonia Avenue to the south, California Street to the east, and Mountain View Avenue to the west. Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. I. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 781 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval for the construction of one (1) warehouse/distribution concrete tilt-up building of 683,269 square feet on approximately 31 acres located on the south side of San Bernardino Avenue, east side of Mountain View Avenue, and north side of Almond Avenue in Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 9 Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. Mr. Asher Hartel gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Hartel stated staff is seeking policy direction from the Commission on the issue of warehouse distribution and location south of San Bernardino Avenue. Mr. Hartel outlined four(4) possible alternatives relative to the amendment to the concept plan: 1. The amendment could be denied,with no further big box warehouses permitted south of San Bernardino Avenue 2. Approve the amendment and allow big box warehouse to extend southerly to Almond Avenue 3. Allow big box warehouse north of Almond Avenue and west of Marigold Avenue, and 4. Allow big box warehouse north of Almond Avenue except for a parcel at California and San Bernardino Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr.Hartel if the amendment to Concept Plan 1 proposes the entire 134 acres be zoned for warehouse. Mr. Hartel stated that was correct. Commissioner Macdonald stated that discussion at the Ad Hoc Zoning Committee specified only the corner to the west of the Salton Development was to be re-designated for warehouse distribution.Mr. Jaquess stated the applicant's proposal is being presented, however staff is providing other alternatives. Mr. Hartel distributed a copy of a revised landscape plan that was submitted by the applicant. Mr. Hartel noted areas of the landscape plan that do not meet standards. Commissioner Laymon stated she appreciated staff's effort particularly relative to architecture. Mr. Hartel stated staff recommends that the twelve(12) foot wide equestrian trail be reduced to ten (10) foot which would allow for more landscaping. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pat Meyer,representing the applicant, stated during processing and development of the Salton building there were several technical issues with regard to the specifics of the plans. Mr. Meyer stated he had a meeting with the Ad Hoc Zoning Committee which included the Chairman Webber and Commissioner Macdonald,as well as the staff and some Councilmembers.Mr.Meyer stated the site along Mountain View, west of the Edison easement seemed to be an appropriate location for large warehouse because of its close proximity to the Edison Power Plant and the sewer lift station. Mr. Meyer stated he would like to open dialogue with the Commission relative to warehousing north of Almond Avenue. Mr. Meyer stated the architect was available to answer questions. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 10 Mr. Meyer stated he would like to focus on the concept plan. Chairman Webber stated his recollection of the discussion was a general consensus that the area east of the Salton development would not be large warehouse,but rather of a size yet to be determined. Commissioner Macdonald concurred with Chairman Webber. Commissioner Macdonald stated he felt the concession to allow the building on the corner of Mountain View and San Bernardino Avenue was to finalize large warehouses below San Bernardino. Commissioner Macdonald stated he was surprised by Mr. Meyer's request for warehouse distribution east of Salton. Mr. Meyer stated he feels the building is appropriate for Mountain View Avenue and a building similar to Salton would be appropriate east of that location. Chairman Webber stated discussion was held on the size of buildings that might be allowed. Commissioner Laymon stated she voted for approval of the Salton building against her better judgment and publicly stated she felt it was a compromise and that she could not support any more large warehouses south of San Bernardino Avenue. Chairman Webber stated he felt we could find a better use for the land in the City than to have it eaten up by warehouses. Chairman Webber stated he would like to see buildings restricted to 150k square feet, east of Salton. Commissioner Macdonald stated he was under the impression that the development in the northwest corner was to be the last large warehouse and the property to the east would be industrial commercial. Commissioner Macdonald stated the line is beginning to move south and he cannot support it. Mr. Meyer stated he would look at the area east of the Salton building, look at designs in the 150k size range, and bring it back to the Commission on June 22nd. Mr. Meyer stated he would look at concepts in the area south of San Bernardino, north of Almond, and east of the Salton building. Commissioner Laymon asked Mr. Meyer to consider their discussion on"homogenous"buildings. The Commissioners expressed concerns with the building elevations and landscaping for the proposed warehouse distribution center. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Concept Plan No. 1 (Amendment 2) and Commission Review and Approval No. 781 to the Planning Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 11 Commission meeting of June 22, 2004. Chairman Webber advised that neither Commissioner Miller nor Cook had arrived at the meeting. N. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION 2004-11-01 - A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 16548, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 64 multiple-family residential units on 5 acres located at the southwest corner of Orange Avenue and Kansas Street. (Note: This request is for 64 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by ABCO REALTY & INVESTMENTS, INC. Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-11-01 which requested 64 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 51 points. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 37 points,for a total of 88 points. O. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION 2004-11-02 - A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 16488, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 7 lots on 10.6 acres located on the north side of Sunset Drive, approximately 200 feet west of Helen Drive. (Note: This request is for 7 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by VESPAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY/WILLIAM C. BUSTER, INC. Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-11-02 which requested 7 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 53 points. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 36 points,for a total of 89 points. P. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION 2004-11-03 - A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for a Residential Development Allocation request for Tentative Tract No. 16556, an approved residential subdivision consisting of 107lots on 40 acres located on the south side of San Bernardino Avenue, east of Hanford Street. (Note: This request is for 107 allocations; no allocations have been previously awarded.) Request submitted by KB HOMES. Mr. Hartel began the review of RDA 2004-11-02 which requested 107 allocations. Mr. Hartel stated that review by other City departments resulted in a total of 60 points. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 12 Commissioner Macdonald asked if the development was approved with five (5) foot side yard setbacks. Mr. Jaquess stated a percentage of the development was allowed with five (5) foot side yard setbacks. After review of the project, the Planning Commission recommended 38 points,for a total of 98 points. Mr. Shaw stated under the point totals that were awarded, one project meets the allocation with 98 points, and two projects do not. Mr. Shaw stated the Commission can take a second consideration if it wishes to do so. Commissioner Miller arrived at 4:12 p.m. Commissioner Macdonald recommended an additional point be awarded under the Landscaping category(page 5)for RDA 2004-II-02,Vespar Development,which brings the total number of points to 90. Commissioner Thompson concurred and the Commission unanimously supported the change. Relative to RDA 2004-11-01, Abco Development, Chairman Webber recommended, with the concurrence of Commissioners Macdonald and Thompson, an additional point be awarded under the Architecture category (page 2). Commissioner Macdonald recommended, with Chairman Webber's concurrence, an additional point be awarded under Site and Grading Design category(page 3) , which brings the total number of points to 90. The Commission agreed. Chairman Webber recessed the meeting at 4:18 p.m. Chairman Webber reconvened the meeting at 4:32 p.m. Chairman Webber stated item V-G Commission Review and Approval No. 779 would be heard at this time. G. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 779- Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio- Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to develop an industrial park to include five buildings with a combined area of 271,093 square feet on an approximately 14.39 acres property located south of Almond Avenue and north of Lugonia Avenue generally west of Research Drive in Concept Plan No. 1 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by WESTERN REALCO. Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 13 Mr. Baeza gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pat Meyer, representing the applicant, stated he had an opportunity to speak with Commissioner Miller during the recess and he has agreed to add additional treatments on Buildings A, B, D, and E, which have corners at street frontages with views. Commissioner Miller stated he felt the design was exceptional and it was a good example of light industrial architecture. Commissioner Miller suggested additional articulation was needed at the corners that are facing the front. Commissioner Miller stated he felt Building C was nicely articulated, however he felt additional articulation was need on Buildings, A, B, D, and E. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Mr. Baeza stated Condition of Approval 36 to read 36. The applicant shall add additional building architectural features for Buildings,A,B,D,and E at the corners that face street frontages. The architecture is to be reviewed with the Final Landscape Plan by the Planning Commission. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Commission Review and Approval No. 779 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 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald, and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Commission Review and Approval No. 779. It is recommended that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald, and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No. 779, subject to the following findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval: Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 14 1. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. 2. That the site properly relates to adjoining streets which are designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed development. 3. That the conditions of approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 779 are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 4. That the use is desirable for the overall development of the community. 5. The proposed project will be consistent with the existing Commercial/Industrial Designation of the General Plan with the addition of Condition of Approval 36 to read : 36. The applicant shall add additional building architectural features for Buildings,A,B,D,and E at the corners that face street frontages. The architecture shall be reviewed with review of the Final Landscape Plan by the Planning Commission. Chairman Webber stated that agenda item IV-A would be heard last, in the hope that Commissioner Cook will be in attendance, as the project requires a 6/7 vote for final approval. VI. ADDENDA VII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. April 27, 2004 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 4-0 vote to approve the Planning Commission minutes of April 27, 2004. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Report Mr. Shaw gave a brief summary of the City Council actions of May 18, 2004. IX. ADJOURNMENT TO JUNE 8, 2004 Item IV-A which was tabled earlier in this meeting was heard at this time. D. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 782- Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 15 to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a Public Hearing for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to construct a two (2) story office/retail building with a floor area of 30,000 square feet located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane approximately 300 feet east of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. Request submitted by R.P. WAGES. Mr. Jaquess stated the project was continued to this date from a prior meeting because it requires a 6/7 vote of approval. Mr. Jaquess stated that staff recommends the project be continued to the June 8t" Planning Commission meeting, because six Commissioners are not in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Jaquess requested the Commissioners keep their staff reports for the next meeting. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pat Meyer, representing the applicant, asked for a consensus of approval from the Commission on the project, in the event the Commission falls short of the required 6/7 vote at the next meeting. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Macdonald stated he had nothing to add. Commissioner Miller stated he is prepared to support the project if it comes to a vote. Chairman Webber concurred with Commissioners Macdonald and Miller, stating he felt it was a good project. Mr. Shaw stated Commissioner Cook called and indicated she would be at the meeting by approximately 3:45. Chairman Webber asked the Commission to make every effort to be at the meeting when a 6/7 vote is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Laymon, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald, and carried on a 4-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 782 to the Planning Commission meeting of June 8, 2004. Chairman Webber adjourned the meeting at 4:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Ortiz, Senior Admin. Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 16 Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of May 25, 2004 Page 17