Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-11-05B_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, January 11, 2005, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: George Webber, Chair James Macdonald, Vice-Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Caroline Laymon, Commissioner Thomas Osborne, Commissioner Gary Miller, 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 Manuel Baeza, Associate Planner David Jump, Junior Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD The meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m. by Chairman Webber.All commissioners were present except Commissioner Miller. Chairman Webber advised the audience that items IV. F- I (ESRI project) will not be heard today. The proposed project has been continued to January 25tH Ms. Carol Smith thanked the Commission for the time and effort they spent reviewing the proposed project for Sprint PCS. Ms. Smith advised the Commission that the proposed project was withdrawn. Ms. Smith thanked staff for its recommendation that the proposed project be denied. Commissioner Laymon stated she was contacted by Ms. Beverly Powell (Souther California Edison Co.)who expressed concern on the Mexican Fan Palm trees that are planted beneath Edison power lines. Commissioner Laymon stated that Edison contacted the developer of the project who is reluctant to relocate the palms because they were conditioned for the project. Ms. Beverly Powell (Southern California Edison)stated that she contacted Mr. Ron Mutter(Public Works Department)and he is working on removing the palms. Ms. Powell asked the Commission to be cognizant of the location of power lines when approving landscaping plans for future projects. Ms. Shaw stated that he would work with the Public Works Department to resolve the issue and report back to the Planning Commission. Mr. Bob Dalquest noted that the Alabama Street street scape design allows Mexican Fan Palms. Ms. Powell noted that it is anticipated that Edison poles on Terracina will be changed to underground utilities sometime in April. Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Pagel Director Jeff Shaw stated he would report back to the Commission. Mr. Shaw stated in areas where there is a designated treescape, staff will have to determine if the treescape should be amended. II. CONSENT ITEMS B. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15469-Planning Commission consideration on an extension of time for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide approximately 110.3 acres into twenty-four (24) residential lots located south of the terminus of Sutherland Drive, Ashforth Drive, and South Lane in Specific Plan No. 47. Request submitted by PAT MEYER. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) B. COMMISSION SIGN REVIEW NO. 277 - Planning Commission to consider a Commission Sign Review to completely remodel and relocate a legal, nonconforming freeway-oriented sign containing a sign area of 145 square feet and a height of thirty-eight (38) feet for the Metro Nissan automobile dealership located at 1665 Industrial Park Avenue in the General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by DAVID A. MARVIN. (Project Planner: Bob Dalquest) MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the consent calendar. Commissioner Miller arrived at 2:09 p.m. and stated he had a conflict of interest with Commission Sign Review No. 277 (Consent Calendar). III. OLD BUSINESS A. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.86-Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING on a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Light Industrial with a park to High Density Residential (0-27 units per acre)on 4.76 acres located on the north side of Orange Avenue 300 feet east of Kansas Street. Request submitted by MARK UTZINGER. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) B. ZONE CHANGE NO. 386 - 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(5 acre lots) to R-3, Multiple Family Residential (1,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit)on 4.76 acres located on the north side of Orange Avenue 300 feet east of Kansas Street. Request submitted by MARK UTZINGER. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 2 C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 768 - 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 for the construction of a one-hundred sixty (160)unit senior apartment complex in eight(8)two story buildings. The project also includes a Density Bonus for Senior Citizen Housing which provides for an increase in density of thirty-two(32)units above the maximum one-hundred twenty-eight(128) units allowed in the proposed zone of R-3, Multiple Residential (1,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit). The proposed project is located on 4.76 acres in the existing A-1, Agricultural District (5 acre lots) proposed for a Zone Change to R-3, Multiple Residential (1,500 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit)on the north side of Orange Avenue 300 feet east of Kansas Street. Request submitted by MARK UTZINGER. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) Project Planner Asher Hartel gave a brief PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Hartel stated that Arrowhead Christian Academy, which is located east of the proposed project, indicated they have concerns about the project due to the impact of their school activities on a senior housing project. Mr. Hartel stated staff is seeking direction from the Commission on the "floating neighborhood park" designation that has been placed on the site. Mr. Hartel stated staff recommends approval of the building elevations, exterior finishes, balconies and patios, subject to revision as required by the Planning Commission (Condition of Approval 31). Mr. Hartel stated the landscape plan is conceptual,and staff required review and approval of a more detailed landscape plan. Mr. Hartel stated there is an issue with the type and height of the trees proposed along the northerly and easterly boundary adjacent to Arrowhead Christian Academy. Mr. Hartel stated the proposed project will be heard by the Park Commission on Thursday,January 13th. Mr. Hartel stated he received 110 additional letters of support. Commissioner Laymon asked Mr. Hartel if the proposed project will meet the requirements for moderate income housing. Assistant Director Jaquess stated that senior housing is considered to be low income housing. Commissioner Macdonald stated he is confused that staff is recommending approval of the proposed project, because there seem to be many issues that need to be addressed. Mr. Shaw stated staff felt they were details that could be handled under an addenda process and staff is comfortable with the site plan, elevations, and landscaping, however there is some refinement needed. Mr. Shaw stated there are some major policy issues that will need to be worked out. Mr.Shaw stated the Commission can continue the proposed project to resolve the issues. Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr. Shaw how a five (5) foot tall sound barrier can be proposed on a balcony. Mr. Hartel stated it was an issue that would have to be resolved. Commissioner Macdonald questioned whether the project should be redesigned. Mr. Hartel stated Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 3 the revisions could be brought back to the Commission as part of the revised architectural elevations. Commissioner Laymon stated it would have been helpful to have the Parks Commission report prior to review by the Planning Commission. Chairman Webber asked if the floating park designation could be moved to another site. Mr. Shaw stated it could be moved as the designation is not site specific. Mr. Shaw stated if the City determines it is an appropriate location for a park site, staff might be required to move forward with the initiation process for a park. Commissioner Miller stated the proposed complex is an active senior facility and he is concerned that there are many seniors who still drive and there may be a high demand for parking. Commissioner Miller asked Mr. Hartel if this issue was considered when the project was evaluated by staff. Mr. Hartel stated the reduction to 80 parking spaces was part of the Bonus Density Agreement that was approved by the City Council. Mr. Shaw stated the proposed project was compared with existing senior housing projects such as Casa De La Vista and Fern Lodge. Mr. Shaw stated the applicant might be able to expand further on this issue. With reference to the sound barrier, Commissioner Miller stated typically a glass barrier is used. Commissioner Miller asked if anyone has checked on previous developments to see how well the glass barriers have worked. Mr. Hartel stated he was not aware of any field tests or results of the glass barriers, however there is a Condition of Approval for the proposed project that requires the noise barrier be evaluated by an acoustical engineer. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Utzinger, applicant,stated a lot of comprehensive and conscientious planning and design has gone into the proposed project including neighborhood, community, and senior input. Mr. Utzinger noted there are two components to qualification for HUD programs, the applicant has to qualify and the project has to qualify. Mr. Utzinger stated his project's parking is consistent with the ratios of existing senior projects. Mr. Utzinger stated the project will provide a wheelchair access shuttle service. Mr. Utzinger stated his intent is to provide the tenants with access into the city without having to drive. Mr. Utzinger noted some amenities provided by his project such as washers and dryers in the units, a pharmacy substation in the clubhouse, and wheelchair access bathrooms and showers. Commissioner Miller asked Mr. Utzinger how he would determine which units have parking, since there are 160 units and 80 parking spaces. Mr. Utzinger stated most of the interested parties they have interviewed indicated that do not have automobiles. Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr. Utzinger how he proposes to meet the balcony requirements. Mr. Utzinger stated they propose to have plexiglass on a portion of the balcony,which will be tested. Chairman Webber stated the matter would return to the Commission for review. Mr. Craig Wilson, representing the Board of Arrowhead Christian Academy, stated there are the Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 4 competing uses of the school versus the retirement community. Mr. Wilson stated the games, students, nighttime football games, lighting, and morning practices will create a nuisance to the retirement community and will impact the police department and other city departments who respond to these issues. Mr. Wilson stated he did not believe the balcony would adequately address the noise issues. Mr. Wilson stated if the Commission should decide to proceed with the proposed project, the Parks Commission power would be usurped. Ms. Tricia Higgins, 105 Tennessee Street, Arrowhead Christian Academy Operations Manager, stated for the past seven years she has received complaints on the noise from the school's general activities and lights only. Ms. Higgins expressed concern that approval of the zone change will not enhance the relationship between ACA and seniors,and may cause a hostile relationship with those residents who live next to the field. Mr. Ron Burgess, 245 Alvarado, Arrowhead Christian Academy Board Chairman, stated ACA adjoins the proposed project on two sides. Mr. Burgess stated they strongly support senior housing however they feel a change in the use of the property will be incompatible with daily student activities. Mr. Burgess stated the sports field is used daily for sports activities and other uses and the field lights can be kept on as late as 11 p.m. Mr. Burgess stated new units have been built south of the school and he is concerned of the impact of an additional 160 units. Commissioner Osborne asked Mr. Burgess what type of night activities occur at ACA other than football and concerts. Mr. Burgess stated they may potentially add baseball in the evenings. Ms. Sandy Carnes, 28311 Saffron Avenue, current President of ACAF(parent organization)stated the proposed complex could be impacted bythe stray baseballs,soccer balls,and footballs because of its close proximity to the sports fields. Ms. Carnes stated existing traffic issues would be increased with the additional 160 units. Mr. Steve Hickock, 105 Tennessee Street, Arrowhead Christian Academy Administrator, thanked the Commission for the many hours it dedicates to thoughtful planning and development of the community. Mr. Hickock stated the school has received complaints on noise from the apartments across the street on Orange Avenue. Mr. Hickock stated that granting of the proposed variance will create a hostile environment, place an additional burden on the city's police resources, and will establish a confrontational climate for any further development of their facility. Mr. Hickock asked the Commission to deny the proposed project. Ms. Sherli Leonard, 31534 Highview Drive, representing the Redlands Conservancy, stated every time a park designation is removed, a "gem" in the emerald necklace is removed. Ms. Brenda Durant, 109 Sandridge Way, read a letter from Ms. Carol Montay stating her opposition to the proposed project. Mr. Mark Sandoval, 111 N. 5th Street, stated it is a great project for the wrong property. Mr. Sandoval offered to buy the property for industrial use, and stated it could be developed with light industrial buildings. Ms. Mary Ann Bretton, 79 Orangewood Court, stated many senior citizens support the school. Ms. Bretton stated every person she has spoken to within her area has been supportive of having a Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 5 senior development close to the school. Ms. Bretton stated housing for senior citizens is needed in our community and she voiced her support of the project. Ms. Bretton stated that senior citizens want to be a part of the community and they want to support the school and its activities. Ms. Linda Aldaco, 95 Tennessee Street, stated when ACA moved in, they turned on bright lights which were left on all night long and they let the buses run at 1:00 a.m. Ms. Aldaco stated she has had to call the police a number of times because of the noise and reflection of lights. Ms. Aldaco stated she believes that seniors would be a great asset to the area. Alisa Meehan, 914 Tennessee Street, President of the Marbrisa Condo Association,stated she has never had a problem with the school noise. Ms. Meehan stated she has never had a problem with parking and she would prefer to see a residential project in the area rather than a trucking company or industrial project. Ms. Bernie Lombard, 1327 Arlene Street, stated they make it sound as if the seniors are dead or dying; seniors are very much alive; they go to ballrooms at the Joslyn Senior Center and have dances. Ms. Lombard stated, "Stop discriminating against the seniors and give them their time to talk." Harry J. O'Connor III, AARP, thanked Chairman Webber for his perceptiveness, stating no matter what is built on the property, it will not be conducive to the needs and wants of the school. Mr. O'Connor stated that ACA has tried to buy the property for years. Mr. O'Connor stated there is a tremendous need for this type of project. Mr. Bob Roberts, stated he had an opportunity to speak with the project engineer and was told that the developer would have an agreement with the tenants which should address the concerns that have been expressed. A Ms. (unintelligible) stated when she has had to call the school to complain, it has been due to behavior or noise taking place at an unreasonable time. Chairman Webber offered Mr. Utzinger an opportunity for rebuttal. Mr. Utzinger stated three acoustic studies were conducted and the third study determined that there was 50% less noise than other projects in the City. Mr. Utzinger stated the school is a selling point for potential tenants. Mr. Utzinger stated the consent agreement acknowledges that the school has uses that will be noisy and will have to be signed off by each tenant. Mr. Utzinger stated the consent agreement gives away the right to complain. Commissioner Laymon asked if the agreement would include future escalation of the property, i.e.,a stadium. Mr. Utzinger stated it would, as long as the school continues to operate under its current usage. Commissioner Miller asked Mr. Utzinger if he would be willing to consider a significant redesign of his project. Commissioner Miller suggested the driveway be placed as a buffer between the school and housing,with the units back to back which could further mitigate some of the issues raised. Mr. Utzinger stated they met with ACA and proposed the same concepts which were not warmly received. Mr. Utzinger stated they received input from neighbors,seniors,and award winning senior designers and have received support for the plan as proposed. Mr. Utzinger stated the noise issue has been addressed and the consent agreement relieves the school of the liability they are worried Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 6 about. Mr. Utzinger stated that senior housing in Redlands is woefully inadequate,with up to a two year waiting list for senior housing. Mr. Utzinger stated the surrounding neighbors are passionately opposed to commercial development on the proposed site. Mr. Utzinger stated he received endorsement letters from Redlands Classics(39 homes), Marbrisa Villas (38 homes),Arroyo Vista Apartments (66 units), and Smiley Neighborhood Association (90 homes). Commissioner Cook asked Mr. Utzinger how he would address the stray softballs and baseballs. Mr. Utzinger stated he would be happy to put up nets. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Chairman Webber asked for a discussion on the noise issue beginning with Commissioner Miller's redesign suggestion. Chairman Webber stated he likes the project as proposed. Commissioner Miller stated the noise issue warrants looking at a design alternative. Commissioner Miller stated if the driveway was relocated to the east boundary, the development would have internal circulation without having to cross a parking lot and there would be an additional buffer of seventy(70)feet for the parking area. Chairman Webber stated he felt the project as proposed "all fits together." Commissioner Thompson stated moving the building would not make much difference as far the noise issue, and he suggested the windows on the second story be double pane. Commissioner Thompson stated the maximum number of home games during the year would be seven, and the number of practice hours are governed by the CIF.Commissioner Thompson stated 160 residences are a considerable resource to the school. Commissioner Laymon stated she likes the project, however there could be a problem unless there is an agreement in place. Commissioner Laymon stated she is concerned about the number of parking spaces proposed for the project. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated the agreement would be between the project owner and the tenant and should address the City's concerns. Mr.Jaquess stated the project could be conditioned to include the agreement. Mr. Jaquess stated that staff evaluated the parking and determined that the demand will be less than a standard residential project. Commissioner Macdonald concurred with Commissioner Millerthat a redesign could greatly improve the situation. Commissioner Macdonald stated the need for an agreement acknowledges that there is a problem. Commissioner Osborne stated he felt it was pretty late to ask the applicant to redesign the project. Commissioner Osborne stated the seniors who would move into this project would probably not be opposed to school activities adjacent to their residences. Commissioner Osborne stated he is comfortable with the agreement. Commissioner Laymon asked for comments from ACA relative to some of the items that have been discussed. Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 7 Chairman Webber stated he felt the noise issue has been addressed. Commissioner Cook stated she lives across the street from an elementary school and she has not been bothered by the noise. There was no consensus from the Commission for a redesign of the project. Chairman Webber stated he liked the openness of the central area and he did not see a need for additional covered parking. Chairman Webber stated the balcony sound barrier issue will come back to the Commission in addition to the double pane windows for the units on the second floor. Commissioner Miller stated there has to be a noise barrier of some type on the housing units which is one of his motivations for a redesign. Chairman Webber asked if the Commission would like to hear from the Parks Commission before making a decision on the proposed project. Commissioners Macdonald, Miller,Thompson, Laymon, Cook stated they would. Commissioner Osborne stated he would not because the floating park designation can be shifted to a more desirable area. Chairman Webber stated there was a consensus from the Commission to table the proposed project until it can be heard by the Park Commission. Commissioner Miller asked if the applicant should be given some input from the Commission relative to the landscaping and architecture. Commissioner Miller stated the architecture is a California Mission style which is massive. Commissioner Miller commented that the window surrounds are very nice. Commissioner Miller noted if the units are "doubled up," the number of elevators could be reduced. Commissioner Osborne asked why the project is being continued to await the input from the Parks Commission if the Planning Commission is not the final acting body. Commissioner Thompson stated the Parks Commission deserves the courtesy of giving the Commission their opinion. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue General Plan Amendment No. 86, Zone Change No. 386, and Conditional Use Permit No. 768 to January 25, 2005. Chairman Webber recessed the meeting for a seven minute break. The Commission reconvened at 4:45 p.m. D. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20044-3-D - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING on a General Plan Amendment to: a)change the land use Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 8 designation from Agriculture to Very-Low-Density Residential on 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168-132- 05), south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) E. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 106 - 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 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168- 132-05), south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) F. ZONE CHANGE NO.406-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 one parcel totaling 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05), south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1,Agricultural District. Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 834 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a PUBLIC HEARING a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development(PRD) on 41.22 gross acres into 93 residential lots and six(6)common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue(Assessors Parcel Number 168-132-05),south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) (The Conditional Use Permit was withdrawn by the applicant and later re-filed, therefore, it needed to be re-noticed and could not be heard by the Commission at this time) H. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16878 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide approximately 41.22 gross acres into 93 residential lots and six (6) common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue (Assessors Parcel Number 168-132- 05), south of San Bernardino Avenue, and north of Capri Avenue in the A-1, Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by ARIEF NAFTALI. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) Project Planner Manuel Baeza stated upon circulation of the latest plans, staff was informed by the Public Works Department that there is a design problem on the distance between two proposed intersections for the project. Mr. Baeza stated the proposed project will be continued, however staff is seeking comments from the Commission on the redesign. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Arief Naftali, applicant's representative, stated the property owner agreed to widen the lots per the suggestion of the Planning Commission. Mr. Naftali stated the open space areas were relocated to the ends of the subdivision to eliminate the odd shaped lots. Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner Macdonald complimented the owner and applicant for maintaining the large lots, reducing the number of homes, having meaningful open space and providing an opportunity to have citrus added to the project. Commissioner Osborne suggested the single story homes be placed on corner lots or be clustered. Mr. Baeza asked if the Condition of Approval should be added to address this issue. Commissioner Osborne stated a verbal suggestion would be sufficient. Commissioner Miller stated there is an opportunity for two rows of citrus along San Bernardino Avenue. Mr. Naftali suggested the two rows could be staggered. It was determined that the citrus rows would be planted in a diamond pattern on San Bernardino Avenue with clusters on the east side of the project. Mr. Naftali stated there is a 15-foot requirement for open space. Chairman Webber noted that the applicant would plant as many citrus trees as possible. Chairman Webber stated he had difficulty reading the legend for the landscaping plan and he suggested the symbols be changed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Osborne,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue General Plan Amendment No. 2004-3-D, Agricultural Preserve Removal No. 106, Change of Zone No.406,and Tentative Tract No. 16878 to the Planning Commission meeting of January 25, 2005. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. MINOR COMMISSION APPROVAL NO. 35 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Minor Commission Approval to allow a two (2) foot reduction in the required side yard setback from the required ten foot side yard on the garage side,for a single family residence located at 312 Gabrielle Way in the R-S, Suburban Residential District. Request submitted by Cynthia Guerrero. Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber offered the applicant an opportunity to speak, however the applicant declined to comment. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Commission Approval No.35 subject to the following findings and attached conditions of approval: 1. That the proposed two (2) foot reduction of the required side yard setback meet 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. Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 10 2. That the reduction of the required side yard will no 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 side 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.848-PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Conditional Use Permit for a medical clinic in The Heritage Center located at 1600 E. Citrus Avenue in the C-2, Neighborhood Convenience District. Request Submitted by EPIC MANAGEMENT. Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Fred Hollis, Senior Vice President of Operations, Epic Management (Beaver Clinic) stated Beaver Clinic is attempting to move out into the community without expanding its existing site. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No.848 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. 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 interest 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 Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 11 businesses or nearby residential uses in the area. Chairman Webber complimented Beaver Clinic for moving ahead with this type of facility in the community. C. VARIANCE NO. 693 - PUBLIC HEARING for a Variance from Section 18.144.200 (B)of the Redlands Municipal Code to permit recreational open space within private rear yards in lieu of the requirement for recreational open space in the proposed common area of Tract No. 16816 located on the east side of Alessandro Road in Specific Plan No. 43. Request submitted by CLIVE PETERS. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 843 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio- Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of a Planned Residential Development on 26.81 gross acres consisting of 10 residential lots and 3 common area lots located on the east side of Alessandro Road in Specific Plan No. 43. Request submitted by CLIVE PETERS. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) E. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16816 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 26.81 gross acres into 10 residential lots and 3 common area lots located on the east side of Alessandro Road in Specific Plan No.43. Request submitted by CLIVE PETERS. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commission Laymon,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Variance No.693,Conditional Use Permit No.843,and Tentative Tract No. 16816 to January 25, 2005. Chairman Webber stated that items IV-F, G, H, and I will be continued. F. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 98 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING on a General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to remove and vacate approximately 230 feet of New York Street north of the intersection with State Street, and a General Plan Land Use Designation Amendment from Light Industrial, Commercial, and Linear Park Overlay to Office. Request submitted by ESRI. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) G. ZONE CHANGE NO. 401- Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Zone Change from M-1, M-2, M-P,and C-4 to A-P on 27.94 Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 12 acres located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of Tennessee Street. Request submitted by ESRI. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) H. STREET VACATION NO. 127 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING to vacate a portion of New York Street located north of the intersection of State Street and New York Street in the M-1, M-2, and M-P Districts. Request submitted by ESRI. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) I. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 19 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Development Agreement to lock-in the existing use of the site and future expansion under the land use policies and regulations of General Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, and Street Vacation No. 127 on 27.94 acres located on both sides of New York Street, north of State Street, and east of Tennessee Street. Request submitted by ESRI. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) Assistant City Attorney Les Murad stated the project was continued because it was not noticed properly. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Cook,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue General Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, Street Vacation No. 127, and Development Agreement No. 19 to January 25, 2005. J. ZONE CHANGE NO. 411 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a PUBLIC HEARING for a Zone Change from R-S, Suburban Residential to T, Transitional District for .45 acres of vacant property located on Roberts Road approximately 400 feet northwest of Laurel Street. Request submitted by Edward Anderson. K. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 794 - 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 Commission Review and Approval for construction of a two-story, 39,178 square foot medical office condominium project and a separate off-site parking facility on 4.29 gross acres located on Terracina Boulevard and Roberts Road approximately 400 feet northwest of Laurel Street in the M-F, Medical Facilities, and R-S, Suburban Residential Districts respectively. Request submitted by Edward Anderson. L. MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 282- 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 Minor Subdivision to subdivide six (6) existing parcels of land into two (2) large parcels for the construction of a two-story, 39,178 Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 13 square foot medical office condominium project located on Terracina Boulevard approximately 400 feet northwest of Laurel Street in the M-F, Medical Facility District. Request submitted by Edward Anderson. Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project, stating that the landscape plan will return to the Commission for review and final approval. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Ed Anderson, applicant, stated the building is owned by local doctors. Mr. Anderson stated that the project has 33 additional parking spaces from what is required. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Chairman Webber asked the applicant to ensure that the trees in the parking lot are fast- growing trees. Mr. Jaquess noted the addition of Condition of Approval 32 to the project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Zone Change 411, Tentative Parcel Map 16954, and Commission Review and Approval 794 to the City Council, 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. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Zone Change 411, Commission Review and Approval 794, and Tentative Parcel Map 16954 to the City Council, as it has been determined that this projectwill 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 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 1051, recommending to the City Council adoption of Zone Change No. 411. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Commission Review and Approval No. Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 14 794 to the City Council, subject to the following findings and attached Conditions of Approval. 1. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use; 2. The site properly relates to Terracina Boulevard and Roberts Road which are designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed development; 3. The Conditions of Approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 794 are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; 4. The use is desirable for the overall development of the community, and the addition of Condition of Approval 33 to read: The applicant shall submit and complete an application for a lot line adjustment to merge parcels 0172-052-10 and 11,the accessory parking area, priorto the issuance of any building permits on this portion of the proposed project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Tentative Parcel Map 16954 to the City Council subject to conditions of approval, and based on the following findings: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. The project has a General Plan land use designation of Office with a designation of"M' stipulating medical offices and a zoning of M-F, Medical Facility District which is consistent with both the General Plan and the Municipal Code; 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The six parcels can be combined and then divided into two separate parcels; 3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a 39,178 square foot, two-story building; 4. The design of the minor subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is not identified as being within an area containing sensitive biological resources or within a wildlife corridor; 5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The commercial project is not likely to cause any serious public health problems, aside from temporary air quality and noise impacts during construction as addressed in mitigation measures #2, 4, 6, and 7. 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 15 with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. 7. That pursuant to California Government Code Section 66474.4, of the subdivision Map Act the land is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The property is not in an agricultural preserve. M. VARIANCE NO. 695-PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Variance from the development standards for front and side yards to allow a 15-foot reduction in the required 25-foot front yard setback and a 5-foot reduction in the required 10-foot side yard setback within the R-A, Residential Estate District of the City's Municipal Code, specifically located at 30450 East Sunset Drive South. Request submitted by Bill Patterson. Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Bill Patterson, applicant, requested the variance so that he may remodel his home. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Laymon, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 695 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 because the proposed property contains a significant amount of slopes on-site and the ultimate half-width right-of- way encroaches onto the existing property by 25 feet eliminating the required 25- foot front yard setback and limiting the amount and types of improvements or expansion that could be constructed on-site. 2. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zoning district, but which is denied to the property in question as identified in the staff report. 3. The granting of the variances will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of others in the vicinity as the proposed additions would not adversely affect surrounding property owners. 4. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 16 City of Redlands. V. ADDENDA A. REVIEW OF APPLICATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN OFF- SALE BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR FORD STREET 76 LOCATED AT 1075 PARKFORD DRIVE. Mr. Jaquess gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Laymon, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Off-Sale Beer and Wine Alcoholic Beverage License self incorporation transferfor Ford Street 76 and no conditions are recommended as there are no problems associated with this site. B. PUBLIC OFFICIAL BIAS Assistant City Attorney stated a copy of a new case on public official bias was distributed to the Commission for information only. C. TRINITY CHURCH LANDSCAPING TIME LIMITATION Mr. Jaquess stated that staff researched the Conditional Use Permit that was approved for the church relative to the temporary parking lot. Mr. Jaquess stated the five-year approval that was granted for a temporary or an interim parking lot, expired on December 14,2004. Mr. Jaquess stated the church can be granted up to three(3)one-year extensions. Mr.Jaquess stated he will contact the church and advise them to submit their request for an extension. Commissioner Thompson stated that five years is a long time to have an interim parking lot and he is not inclined to support an extension unless the church can provide a good reason why one is needed. Commissioner Macdonald concurred with Commissioner Thompson. Commissioner Miller asked if the church loses its ability to apply for an extension if the time period has expired. Mr. Jaquess stated it may be that the applicant will have to apply for a revision to the Conditional Use Permit to have the time extended. Mr. Shaw stated the church has gone beyond its time frame and may be required to amend their Conditional Use Permit. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. November 23, 2004 MOTION Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 17 It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Laymon abstaining) to approve the Planning Commission minutes of November 23, 2004. VII. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Report Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council actions of December 21St and January 4m Mr. Shaw stated a presentation of the Downtown Master Plan Charrette process was given by Torti Galls. Mr. Shaw stated he has copies of the presentation on disk which can be distributed to the Commission if requested. Mr. Shaw stated staff could spend some time during a Planning Commission meeting to discuss the process and Chairman Webber concurred. VIII. ADJOURN TO JANUARY 25, 2005 Chairman Webber adjourned the meeting to January 25th at 6:05 p.m. Patti Ortiz, Senior Administrative Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of January 11, 2005 Page 18