Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-08-04_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, June 8, 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(Absent day session only) Thomas Osborne, Commissioner(Absent evening session only) Paul Thompson, Commissioner ABSENT: ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Leslie E. Murad II, 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 Commissioner Miller. Chairman Webber advised the Commission and members of the audience that parking permits are available from the Planing Commission Secretary for those who are parked in the Civic Center parking lot. Chairman Webber stated the parking lot was recently changed to a posted 30 minute and 60 minute parking zone and is strictly being enforced. Mr. Shaw stated that the parking permit can be obtained at any time during the meeting, and should be placed on the vehicle dashboard so that it is visible. Chairman Webber thanked Mr. Shaw and his department for their hard work in preparing the agenda items. He stated he appreciates all the work that goes into preparing for the meeting stating that staff does their part enthusiastically and professionally. Chairman Webber opened the public comment period. Seeing no comments forthcoming. Chairman Webber closed the public comment period. A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 813 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit to install a seventy foot high wireless telecommunications facility (water tower)located in a City Grove south of the I-10 freeway and east of California Street within the EV/CG,General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by SPRINT PCS. Project Planner Alicia Heideman stated the applicant has not provided revised plans and the CEQA expiration date is September 10th. Therefore, Ms. Heideman requested the proposed project be Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Pagel continued to August 10, 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 Macdonald,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Conditional Use Permit no. 813 to August 10, 2004. B. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 774 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration and consideration of 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. C. VARIANCE NO.674-PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Variance from Sections 18.168.030(C)(4), 18.164.270(A),and 18.64.090 to allow vehicles to back into an alley, 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, and to allow a two(2)foot encroachment of parking within the required front yard setback on Parkwood Avenue 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. (WITHDRAWN) Project Planner Alicia Heideman stated the proposed project was continued to this date at the April 13th Planning Commission meeting. Since that time, revisions have been made to the proposed project. Ms. Heideman stated the Variance application was withdrawn because the applicant was able to provide a block wall and has revised the parking so as not to provide access into the alley or extend into the setback area and now meets Code requirements. She stated the building will be used for a regular office, not a medical office and the elevations and landscape plan remain the same. Mr. Shaw stated the applicant no longer plans to use the building for his medical offices, however the site meets the parking requirements and it could be used for a medical office 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 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Commission Review and Approval No. 774 and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination" in accordance with City guidelines. It has been determined this project will not individually or cumulatively affect wildlife resources as defined in Section 711.2 of the California Fish and Game Code. Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 2 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No. 774 subject to the following findings: 1. The size and shape of the site are adequate for the proposed Office. 2. The site properly relates to Parkwood Street and Brookside Avenue which are designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by an Office. 3. The conditions proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 774 and shown on the site plan are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the neighborhood and the City of Redlands. 4. When completed, the project will contribute to the overall development of the neighborhood. 5. The proposed project will be consistent with the existing Office Designation of the General Plan. Mr. Shaw asked Ms. Heideman if a written request for the withdrawal of the variance was received from the applicant. Ms. Heideman stated a letter was received. D. 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. Project Planner Alicia Heideman stated the proposed project was continued at the last Planning Commission because the Commission did not have six Commissioners present for the required 6/7 vote. Ms. Heideman stated the project has not been revised, therefore staff is recommending approval of Commission Review and Approval No. 782. 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 Osborne and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Commission Review and Approval No. 782, 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. Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 3 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson,seconded by Commissioner Osborne and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Commission Review and Approval No. 782. 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 Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Osborne and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the reduced LOS at the intersection of Alabama Street/Redlands Boulevard during the peak hours as permitted in General Plan Policy 5.20b and 5.20c. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Osborne and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No.782,subject to the following findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval: 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 Lugonia Avenue and Nevada Street 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. 782 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 Designation of the General Plan. E. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 778 - 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 for the construction of a business park of five single story buildings with 89,640 square feet on 5.5 acres, located on the east side of Alabama Street between Park Avenue and State Street in the Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by WMF DESIGNS. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated staff has been working with the applicant on architectural revisions and is requesting a continuance to June 22nd to finalize the revisions. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 4 Commissioner Macdonald noted he is having difficulty determining when the Commission is going to reach its saturation limit by approving reduced Level of Service(LOS)requirements. Commissioner Macdonald stated he wonders when the Commission will arrive at a point where it can no longer approve develop projects with reduced LOS. Chairman Webber stated when the Commission acquired the delegated powerfrom City Council for a 6/7 vote, discussion was held on this issue. Chairman Webber stated there is a point when the Commissioners will become uncomfortable approving these development projects. Chairman Webber stated it is a good comment to be brought forward by Commissioner Macdonald. Commissioner Osborne stated he brought up the issue previously and he feels that traffic studys that are required for development projects will indicate how much of their traffic will impact the intersection of Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard. Mr. Jaquess stated most of the development projects such as this impact the intersection by 1%or 2%. Mr. Jaquess stated that partial funding of the improvements to that intersection come from development impact fees that are required for the projects. Mr. Jaquess stated if it is determined that they don't want more development until the intersection is improved, a significant source of funding will be cut off. Commissioner Macdonald asked if a development project with a denser use(i.e.,office building with 100-300 employees) is proposed, does the Commission then make a decision not to approve it. Commissioner Macdonald stated he is concerned because the Commission is coming across development projects requiring the 6/7 vote on almost every Planning Commission agenda. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 778 to June 22, 2004. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. VARIANCE NO. 682 - PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission to consider a Variance from Section 18.52.130 of the Redlands Municipal Code to waive the requirement for front-yard setback of twenty-five (25)feet to allow a swimming pool, pool equipment, and wood fence six (6) feet in height at the side of the existing house on a corner lot at 815 Merced Street (southwest corner of Merced St. And Colton Avenue)in the R-1, Single Family Residential District. Request submitted by CHRISTINE FOSTER. Project Planner Alicia Heideman gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Ms. Christine Foster, applicant, noted that her correct address is 805 Merced Street, not 815 Merced , as previously noted in the staff report. Ms. Foster stated she wants to install a block wall that will help buffer the noise coming from Colton Avenue. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 5 Chairman Webber asked Ms. Heideman for clarification on the type of fence to be installed. Ms. Heideman stated she thought the applicant was requesting a wood fence however,the applicant is actually requesting a block wall. Mr. Shaw stated that staff has no objection, and would prefer to see a block wall rather than a wood fence. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 682 subject to the following findings and attached Conditions of Approval: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions to this property because this is a corner lot and it is difficult to make any additions or provide backyard amenities which meet the code requirements.The size and configuration of the house and limited yard areas provide for exceptional circumstances for this request. 2. There are many instances on surrounding streets that already have the setbacks requested and variances for the front yard setback have been recently granted under Variance Nos. 617, 658 and 676 along with numerous fence modification actions throughout the City. Therefor this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity or zone district. 3. The applicant's request for reduced front yard setbacks will not have a negative impact on the City, neighborhood, or any specific property owner and will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of others in the vicinity. 4. The granting of the requested variance will not conflict and will not adversely affect the City's General Plan, with a revision to Condition of Approval 2 to read: The project approval includes the granting of a variance for reduction of the front yard setback from twenty-five (25) feet to 11' 6" for a swimming pool, and eight (8) feet from the Colton Avenue property line for a wall with a height of fide (5) foo+ maximum height of six (6) feet. B. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 770 (REVISION NO. 1)- Planning Commission to consider a revision to the site plan and landscape plan on an approved 34,482 square foot automotive sales and service center for Metro Nissan on approximately 4.68 acres by eliminating five (5) landscape planters within the inventory parking area, and replacing the perimeter trees with two different tree species located at 1655 Industrial Park Avenue in the General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by DAVID A.MARVIN. Planning Commission Minutes of June 8, 2004 Page 6