Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-05_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, January 25, 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 - 3 MINUTES Chairman Webber advised the audience that parking permits are available from the Planning Commission secretary for those who are parked in the Civic Center parking lot. Chairman Webber advised the audience that agenda item IV A, B, and C would be heard after agenda item IV D and E to allow a suitable time for discussion of the proposed project. II. CONSENT ITEMS (It is recommended that the following item(s) be acted upon simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by a Commissioner or a member of the audience.) A. MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 281 (PARCEL MAP NO. 16729) - Request for Final Approval of Parcel Map No. 16729(Minor Subdivision No.281)located north of Palmetto Avenue and west of Marigold Avenue in Concept Plan 2 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by ROBERT PATILLO PROPERTIES. (Project Planner: David Jump) MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Osborne,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Subdivision No.281 (Parcel Map No. 16729). III. OLD BUSINESS Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Pagel 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) 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 presentation on the proposed project. Commissioner Macdonald asked if the tenant rental agreement had been reviewed by the City Attorney and he asked why the City would be involved in reviewing the rental agreement. Director Jeff Shaw stated there was a proposed agreement that has since been rescinded and replaced with a unilateral agreement but the City has not been made a part of the agreement. Commissioner Macdonald asked Mr. Hartel if there are other senior living, general apartments, or private residences that were constructed with a waiver and a requirement for sound walls on balconies. Mr. Hartel stated he was not aware of any. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated there were senior citizen projects with balconies such as Fern Lodge that were constructed prior to Measure U becoming effective. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Shaw stated there was a noise issue discussed relative to Fern Lodge and a noise study was required because of its close proximity to Redlands Boulevard. Commissioner Macdonald asked if an issue involving the balcony size had been resolved. Mr. Hartel stated that it had not. Commissioner Macdonald stated there is no condition of approval requiring a block wall on the north end of the property that abuts Arrowhead Christian Academy (ACA), although it was noted in the Environmental Review Committee staff report. Mr. Hartel stated the site plan does show six(6)foot block walls around the entire site. Mr. Shaw stated the plans show a six(6)foot masonry wall on the north side of the property, but it could be made a requirement of the project. Commissioner Macdonald asked for examples of the light industrial zoning uses that would be allowed on the site. Commissioner Macdonald stated he believed many of the neighbors are under the impression that heavy commercial uses would possibly be allowed. Mr. Hartel stated that light industrial zoning would allow for business park uses and not general or heavy industrial type projects. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Bud Thatcher,Thatcher Engineering,stated staff indicated that the project would not be required to have an agreement in place, although Planning Division Condition of Approval 21 requires all future residents be notified of adjacent land uses and the possibility of noise and light intrusion on the property which shall be included in the tenant rental agreement for review and approval by the city attorney prior to issuance of building permits. Mr. Hartel stated the recommendation from the Environmental Review Committee(ERC)was that it be included but not necessarily as a mitigation measure. Mr. Thatcher stated the applicant concurs and is willing to satisfy the Condition of Approval. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Macdonald stated he fully supports the project and understands the need for senior housing in the City, and the project is very attractive but he does not believe the location is appropriate. Commissioner Macdonald stated it is an inappropriate General Plan Amendment because the site is zoned for light industrial as a transition from the heavy, high density residential zoning to the commercial industrial zoning on Alabama Street. Commissioner Macdonald questioned how the ERC accepted that a Friday night football game would produce a CNEL level less than significant in the initial acoustical analysis. Commissioner Macdonald stated they are forgetting the needs and concerns of Arrowhead Christian Academy, who currently have to deal with noise complaints from the neighbors across the street. Commissioner Macdonald stated they have a responsibility to ACA to ensure their status as a school is not jeopardized by what is approved adjacent to their property. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 3 Commissioner Macdonald stated they are forgetting the needs of the senior citizens who wait years to acquire the apartments and then find that the noise from the high school is not compatible with their lifestyle. Commissioner Macdonald questioned why there would be an agreement and five (5) foot high sound barriers on the patios if there wasn't a genuine problem that concerned the developer. Commissioner Macdonald stated he cannot support the project at this location. Commissioner Laymon asked what other mitigation measures would have been required if the school stadium had already been in place. Mr. Shaw stated the noise consultant was asked to evaluate the noise based on the school and its existing facilities. Mr. Hartel concurred with Mr. Shaw. Mr. Mark Utzinger, applicant,stated this issue was addressed by the noise study and the consultant was instructed to take into account a future stadium at the location. Mr. Utzinger stated the study found a lower level of sound coming into the project units than was originally assumed. Mr. Utzinger stated the standards regarding sound were determined bythe City and the project satisfies those standards. Mr. Utzinger stated if the Commission decides that the noise issue can stop the project, then the City needs to identify why the project has to meet higher standards than other projects in the City and by what right. Commissioner Thompson stated he believes Mr. Utzinger would have his tenants sign an agreement because there is a problem and he would want the tenant to be aware of the school activities next to the project. Mr. Utzinger stated they have addressed the concerns of their neighbor and they feel the consent declaration is an excellent tool because it guarantees awareness and relieves liability for their neighbor, Arrowhead Christian Academy. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Thompson commented on Commissioner Macdonald's belief that this is an inappropriate use stating they received quite a few letters from surrounding residents stating they prefer this type of development to a business park. Chairman Webber stated the school was the first invasion into the light industrial territory and he feels the proposed project serves as a buffer into the light industrial zone. Commissioner Osborne concurred with Chairman Webber. Commissioner Miller stated the change to multifamily is probably better suited to the neighbors that are there. Commissioner Miller noted that there are two issues; noise and the impact of other activities such as balls flying in from the field. Commissioner Miller stated the City sets the standards and asks developers to abide by the standards. Commissioner Miller stated he supports the land use change and he believes the use is compatible with residential. Commissioner Miller stated he cannot support the Mitigated Negative Declaration motion because there is more mitigation that can easily be done on the project. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 4 Commissioner Miller suggested the windows that face the ballfield be dual paned tempered glass. Commissioner Thompson noted there was a suggestion to put up netting and trees. Chairman Webber stated it is the responsibility of the school to keep balls from going onto other properties. Commissioner Osborne concurred with Chairman Webber. Commissioner Miller suggested tempered glass windows be required to address this issue. Director Jeff Shaw suggested a Condition of Approval requiring tempered glass windows be required for the Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Webber asked for a consensus from the Commission on the location for tempered glass windows. Commissioner Cook stated she did not think tempered glass was necessary if a football stadium is going to be built. Commissioner Macdonald suggested the east and north side. Commissioner Cook questioned why the applicant should bear the cost of the tempered glass windows, and she supported the east side only. Commissioner Laymon stated she felt that tempered glass is reasonable and she suggested the top floor of the north and east sides only. Commissioner Osborne stated he is not in favor of tempered glass; he would prefer to see 36 inch box trees on the north and east property lines. Chairman Webber stated he is not in favor of tempered glass. Commissioner Laymon supported tempered glass on the second story only. A consensus was reached to require tempered glass on the top floor only, north and east sides. Commissioner Laymon asked Assistant City Attorney Murad for clarification on the development consent declaration. Assistant City Attorney Murad stated since the City is not a part of the declaration, it has not been analyzed by the City Attorneys office. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-1 vote (Commissioner Macdonald voting no)that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment No. 86, Zone Change No. 386, and Conditional Use Permit No. 768 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 January 25, 2005 Page 5 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commission Thompson,and carried on a 6- 1 vote (Commissioner Macdonald voting no) that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 985 and recommend that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No 86. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Thompson, and carried on a 6-1 vote (Commissioner Macdonald voting no)that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 986 and recommend that the City Council approve Zone Change No. 386. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-1 vote(Commissioner Macdonald voting no) that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Conditional Use Permit No. 768 as it has been determined 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 Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 6-1 vote (Commissioner Macdonald voting no)that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve a 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 and City Council Resolution 6202. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 5-2 vote (Commissioners Macdonald and Miller voting no) that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit No. 768 based on the following findings: 1. That the proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City, because the project site is designated "High Density Residential" by the amended General Plan and is within the "R-3, Multiple Family Residential" Zoning District as amended. The proposed senior apartment complex is consistent with the City's land use plans as amended by the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change; 2. That the proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, because conditions of approval from various City departments require any necessary improvements; 3. That the proposed development will comply to the maximum extent feasible Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 6 with the regulations of the City's General Plan, the applicable zoning district and the City's development standards because current standards have been applied to the project conditions of approval; 4. That the proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location because both the General Plan and Zoning District provide for a senior apartment complex at the project site on Orange Avenue with the addition of Condition of Approval 32 to read: The top floor along the northerly and easterly boundaries are to have tempered glass windows which shall be shown on the plans prior to the issuance of a building permit. D. 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) E. 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 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) F. 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) G. 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) Project Planner Asher Hartel gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Hartel stated the proposed Street Vacation will remove a portion of New York Street located in the southerly part of the campus. Mr. Hartel stated the applicant indicated that increased pedestrian traffic traversing the campus makes it desirable to approve the Street Vacation. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 7 Mr. Hartel stated the applicant is proposing a Development Agreement to lock in the existing and proposed use of the site for thirty years. Mr. Hartel stated the applicant has not submitted specific plans relative to future development or expansion of the site. Mr. Hartel noted a number of staff concerns in the language of the Development Agreement. Mr. Hartel stated a Condition of Approval from the Public Works Department and Planning Division that required the applicant to construct a traffic signal at Tennessee Street and Park Avenue has been deleted. Mr. Hartel noted that a traffic signal at this intersection is warranted, but the City has determined that its installation should not be the responsibility of the applicant. Mr. Hartel stated that staff recommends the proposed project be continued to allow for further clarification of the proposed Development Agreement. Mr. Shaw stated the main issue of concern for staff relates to the Development Agreement. Mr. Shaw stated the applicant would like to see the majority of the project move forward, with the Development Agreement being continued. Mr. Shaw stated that staff will go forward with a recommendation that the traffic signal be installed by the City, however it is a policy decision that will be made by City Council. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pat Meyer, representing the applicant, thanked staff for their cooperation. Mr. Meyer stated ESRI has had to deal with multiple zoning and General Plan designations. Mr. Meyer stated the applicant intends to integrate the campus for its 1,700 employees. Mr. Meyer stated that ESRI submitted a Development Agreement to lock in the zoning and development standards associated with that zoning. Mr. Meyer stated they are comfortable with the Development Agreement being continued for 30 days to allow sufficient time to work out the language. Mr. Meyer stated he concurs with the mitigation measures. Mr. Meyer stated he appreciates that staff looked into the traffic signal issue and revised the Condition of Approval relative to the installation of the traffic signal. Commissioner Osborne stated there are four way stops at State/Tennessee and New York/State that will be impacted by the closure of New York Street. Mr. Meyer stated that staff has crafted the Conditions of Approval so that if the two signals are not installed, New York Street cannot be vacated. Mr. Meyer stated the traffic signals are warranted with or without the closure of New York Street. Commissioner Cook asked if the linear park/trail that is adjacent to Jennie Davis Park will be closed. Mr. Meyer responded by saying the open space linear park designation will not be changed. Mr. Jim Smith, State Street,stated he did not believe the closing of the street is justified because the access to a post office is being shut off. Mr. Smith stated wheel chair bound residents will have to detour through City streets facing traffic to get to the post office. Ms. Cathy Alvarado, Center Street,stated she doesn't care how many traffic studies are conducted, there is no way to count the number of walkers who walk to the post office every morning. Ms. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 8 Alvarado stated that someone trying to make a left hand turn and cross Redlands Boulevard from New York Street is going to get killed. Ms. Alvarado stated her father uses his wheel chair to go to the post office;this street will now be cut off to him. Ms.Alvarado stated she opposes the closure of New York Street. Ms. Alvardo stated she would prefer to see a causeway rather than closing the street. Mr. Paul Reed, a retired safety engineer from TRW, stated he frequently walks to the post office, and he cannot believe a traffic artery to a government facility would be closed to accommodate a private firm. Mr. Reed concurred with Commissioner Osborne,stating there are many older people who cannot manipulate a left-hand turn through four lanes of traffic and make that turn safely. Mr. Reed stated that ESRI is a good neighbor and a good company, but to close a street in an effort to accommodate ESRI's proposal does not make good sense to him. Ms. Louis Hayes, stated she drives to the post office on New York Street. Ms. Hayes questioned why a pedestrian ramp can't be built over the street. Ms. Hayes stated she cannot see why we would accommodate the pedestrians at ESRI when the students at the high school are not being accommodated. Mr. Pat Meyer stated it is their intent to allow pedestrian access from State Street to the post office and a sidewalk will be provided northerly through the vacated area to the post office. Mr. Meyer stated he would be happy to accept a Condition of Approval to provide permanent pedestrian access to the post office. Chairman Webber stated he has listened to the serious points made by the four speakers. Chairman Webber asked why ESRI has justification for closing of the street. Chairman Webber asked Mr. Meyer if the post office is aware of the street vacation. Mr. Meyer stated that the post office has indicated verbally that they are supportive of the street vacation. Chairman Webber stated he is wavering on closing New York Street. Mr. Meyer stated there will be a benefit with the installation of the traffic signals, because of the ease of traffic. Mr. Meyer stated he did not think having to go around a half a block is an extreme hardship to get to the post office. Chairman Webber stated that currently the residents who go to the post have three opportunities to exit; State Street, Park Avenue, or Redlands Boulevard. Chairman Webber stated a lot of pressure is going to be put on Park Avenue if New York Street is closed. Commissioner Cook asked Mr. Ron Mutter, Public Works Director, why a traffic signal is not installed at New York Street and Redlands Boulevard. Mr. Mutter responded by stating in order to install a traffic signal they would need permission from both the railroad and the Public Utilities Commission but they would never obtain it through the state process. Mr. Meyer stated he believes in the future, ESRI will be the facilitator in cleaning up the intersection at New York Street and Redlands Boulevard. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 9 Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Osborne stated he felt it would be detrimental to the residents of Redlands if the street is vacated prior to the installation of the traffic signals. Chairman Webber stated the Development Agreement would be continued for 30 days. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment No. 98, Zone Change No. 401, Street Vacation No. 127, and Development Agreement No. 19 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 approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1052 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 98, 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 changing the designation of the property from Light Industrial and Commercial to Office. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1053 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 401, changing the designation of the property from M-1 (Light Industrial), M-2 (General Industrial), M-P(Planned Industrial), and C-4 (Highway Commercial) Districts to A-P (Administrative and Professional Office) District. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council consider the preservation of a path or pedestrian walkway as part of the Street Vacation. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Development Agreement No. 19 to February 22, 2005. Chairman Webber requested a short recess. Chairman Webber reconvened the meeting at 4:29 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 10 H. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 101 -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 designation from Agriculture to Very-Low-Density Residential on 41.22 gross acres located on the west side of Wabash Avenue, 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) I. 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, 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) J. 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,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) K. 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 (four (4) common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue, 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) L. 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 four (4) common lots located on the west side of Wabash Avenue, 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 gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr.Arief Naftali, representing the applicant,expressed the property owner's appreciation to staff. Mr. Naftali stated that the location of the intersection of B and C Street was revised to meet the requirements of the Public Works Department. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 11 Chairman Webber thanked Mr. Naftali for his patience. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment No.101,Agricultural Preserve Removal No.106, Zone Change No. 406, Tentative Tract No. 16878, and Conditional Use Permit No. 834 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 Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Socio- Economic Cost Benefit Study for General Plan Amendment No. 101,Agricultural Preserve Removal No.106,Zone Change No.406, Tentative Tract No. 16878, and Conditional Use Permit No.834 as it has been determined 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 Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Cook,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1043, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 101, changing the designation of the property from Agricultural to Very-Low-Density Residential. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1044 recommending that the City Council adopt Agricultural Preserve Removal No. 106 based upon the following findings: 1. The applicants are the legal owner's of record. Lin Consulting is authorized to represent the owners by a notarized affidavit included in the development application; 2. The land requested to be removed from the preserve abuts a developed zone other than agricultural. There is existing or planned residential development to the east, west and south; 3. The application will be in conformity with the City of Redlands'General Plan. The General Plan land use designation will be Very Low Density Residential and the project is consistent with this designation; 4. The land requested to be removed from the Preserve shall not circumvent land under contract in accordance with the California Land Conservation Act Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 12 of 1965. The project site is not under Williamson Act Contract; 5. The development will not adjoin lands under Williamson Act Contract and thus will not share a common boundary with contract lands. Development of the project will not impact agricultural uses found on contract land. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 1045, recommending to the City Council adoption of Zone Change No. 406. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Laymon,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 834 based on the following findings: 1. The Planned Residential Development applied for west of Wabash Avenue and south of San Bernardino Avenue is proper for a Conditional Use Permit; the project meets all requirements of the Planned Residential Development Ordinance; 2. The Planned Residential Development as proposed is a project that is necessary, essential or desirable for the public welfare as well as the development of the community; the project will provide new housing opportunities for future and current City residents; 3. The Planned Residential Development is not detrimental to existing or permitted uses in the proposed R-E, Residential Estate District where it would be located; 4. The size and shape of the site are adequate for the proposed Planned Residential Development; the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed seventy-six (76) lots; 5. The site properly relates to Wabash Avenue and San Bernardino Avenue which is designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed Planned Residential Development; 6. The conditions set forth on this Conditional Use Permit are deemed necessary and reasonable to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; the best interests of the neighborhood; 7. The proposed project will be consistent with the proposed Very Low Density Residential (0-2.7 units per acre) General Plan Designation. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Laymon,and carried on a Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 13 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Tentative Tract No.16878 subject to conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: 5. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. The project has a proposed General Plan land use designation of Very-Low Density Residential and a proposed zoning of R-E, Residential Estate and is consistent with both the General Plan and Municipal Code including the Planned Residential Development Ordinance; 6. The site, which is located on the west side of Wabash Avenue, and south of San Bernardino Avenue, is physically suitable for the type of development. The site has a relatively flat grade and is large enough to subdivide into seventy-six (76) lots; 7. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a seventy-six (76) lot subdivision. The General Plan Land Use Designation of Very-Low Density allows for up to seventy-six(76)dwelling units; 8. The design of the 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 biological resources or within a wildlife corridor; 9. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. This is a residential project and is not likely to cause any serious public health problems, aside from temporary air quality and noise impacts during construction addressed in the project's Mitigation Measures; 10. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; public streets and pedestrian access will be provided throughout the project site; 11. 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 Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 14 not under Williamson Act Contract. IV. NEW BUSINESS Chairman Webber advised that agenda item IV-D and IV-E would be heard out of sequence. D. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16915 - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and a PUBLIC HEARING on a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide approximately 1.74 acres into 6 residential lots located along the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Redlands Street in the R-S, Suburban Residential district. Request submitted by ROSE VILLAS LLC. (Project Planner: David Jump) Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr.Youssef Amin, architect,thanked staff for their continued effort forthe past year. Mr.Amin stated that the Commission will be very proud of the project; it will incorporate technology and they will be smart homes. Mr. Amin stated they will be preserving a house on the property that is almost one hundred years old. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 16915 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 Cook, seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Tentative Tract Map No. 16915 as it has been determined 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 Cook,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16915 subject to conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: 5. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. The project has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential and a zoning of R-S, Suburban Residential District,with both the General Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 15 Plan and Municipal Code; 6. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The site is large enough to subdivide into six (6) lots; 7. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a six(6)unit subdivision. The General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential and R-S, Suburban Residential District zoning both allow the proposed six (6)dwelling units; 8. The design of the 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 biological resources or within a wildlife corridor; 9. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. This is a residential project and is not likely to cause any serious public health problems, aside from temporary air quality and noise impacts during construction addressed in the project's Mitigation Measures; 10. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements,acquired by the public at large,for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; 11. 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. E. VARIANCE NO. 698 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Variance from Section EV 3.0715 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to allow a reduction in the required twenty-five (25)foot street side setback to 18 feet along the eastern property boundary adjacent to Alabama Street for the Hawthorne Suites Hotel located at 1650 Industrial Park Avenue in the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by RAMIBEN BHIKA MAKAN. (Project Planner: David Jump) Project Planner David Jump gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Jump stated during grading, the applicant discovered a discrepancy in the information provided to them. The applicant brought this matter to the attention of the City, and opted to file an application for a variance. Mr. Jump stated the building had to be moved to the southeast, creating non-compliance with the first variance that was approved for the project. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Ken Fong, architect, stated he discovered a discrepancy in their calculations after commencing Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 16 with the grading on the project and he notified the Building and Safety Division immediately. Mr. Fong stated they are unable to eliminate room counts because of the financing therefore, they are asking for a variance to continue with their project. Commissioner Miller asked for clarification on the landscaping plans (L-1 and L-1A), stating the original concept depicts more shrubbery. Commissioner Miller asked if any of the shrubs shown on the original landscape plan (L-1) were eliminated. Mr. Fong stated he was not aware of the elimination of any shrubs. Mr. Shaw stated that Condition of Approval 6 should reflect that the landscape plan has been revised as shown on sheet L-1. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Miller,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 698 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 discrepancies found in field measurements and calculations have made it impossible for the applicant to comply with the previous Conditions of Approval regarding the Alabama street side setback and an approved 15 foot setback along the freeway. 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 such as adjoining properties along Industrial Park Avenue. 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of others in the vicinity as the current setback from the actual roadway is 65 feet and would not affect surrounding property owners or the general public. 4. The granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Redlands with a revision to Condition of Approval 6 to read: All shrubs shown on the new landscape plans as 1 gallon in size shall be substituted for 5 gallon size shrubs of the same variety and species. Landscaping to reflect Landscape Plan L-1. All shrubs shown shall be increased from 1 gallon to 5 gallon. A. VARIANCE NO. 693 - PUBLIC HEARING for a Variance from Section18.144.200 (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) Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 17 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) C. 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) Project Planner Manuel Baeza gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Baeza stated staff is recommending the building pads be reduced by 25% for the overall area , however if an individual property owner would like to increase the size of the building pad it can be accomplished by the filing of an application for a Commission Review and Approval. Mr. Shaw stated that staff met with the applicant to discuss the size of the pads, which are very large. Mr. Shaw noted that the applicant expressed concerns relative to coming back with a revised grading plan and indicated they have been moving forward based on criteria and conceptual plans of the Specific Plan. Mr. Shaw stated the applicant indicated if they were to reduce the grading, they would prefer to have some flexibility relative to which lots would be reduced. Mr. Shaw stated that staff came up with a formula for a 25% reduction. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Bud Thatcher, representing the applicant, stated it is a difficult parcel because of the topography. Mr. Thatcher reviewed the pad sizes of the individual lots in the tract: Pad 1 12,555 Pad 4 22,320 Pad 7 19,139 Pad 10 18,748 Pad 2 15,177 Pad 5 14,954 Pad 8 19,864 Pad 3 20,422 Pad 6 18,637 Pad 9 24,552 Mr. Thatcher noted there are very clear graphics in the Sunset Hills Specific Plan that show circulation, lot locations, pad and graded areas,detention basins,and trails. Mr.Thatcher stated to arbitrarily reduce the pads by 25% reduces the average lot size from 18,600 square feet to 13,900 square feet but he did not believe a 25% reduction in the pads will have a substantial effect on the view shed from Alessandro Road and the street. Commissioner Miller suggested a cul-de-sac at the end of lot 1 would eliminate the need for building the southerly portion of the road. Mr. Thatcher stated he did not believe he had the freedom to change the circulation pattern from the Specific Plan. Mr. Thatcher stated the pad sizes have been Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 18 reduced by 7% and he does not agree with reducing the pads by an additional 25% to make them smaller. Mr. Shaw stated the 25% was not an arbitrary number; after meeting with staff the applicant suggested perhaps an overall percentage reduction that would provide some flexibility. Mr. Shaw stated staff felt there was more grading on the project than needed to be. Mr. Thatcher stated when the reduction percentage was discuss they did not have the numbers available and had not calculated the lot sizes. Mr. Thatcher stated he did not see a substantial change in what would be visible from across the street with the pad reduction. Chairman Webber asked Mr. Thatcher how the Fuel Modification plan will impact the project. Mr. Thatcher stated it would remain at natural grade, however the fuel would be thinned, not removed. Commissioner Laymon asked if there is a way to do an overall site reduction of grading instead of reducing the pad size. Chairman Webber noted that it would mean a change of plan. Mr. Thatcher stated it had not been considered because they felt they were on a path to satisfy the requirements of the Specific Plan. Commissioner Miller suggested contouring of the grading rather than mandate a reduction in pad size. Mr.Thatcher stated the old way of carving the slopes does create an artificial slope, and there is the ability to round the edges and contour the manufactured slopes from one pad to the other. Mr. Thatcher stated it would soften the slopes that are between the pads. Chairman Webber suggested the proposed project be continued to allow Mr. Thatcher the opportunity to show the contour grading between the pads. Commissioner Miller stated he was hoping they could apply the same principal on the embankment at the lower portion of the southern road by varying the steepness slightly. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Commissioner Cook asked if there was a way to bring back an example of the cross section of the sloping. Chairman Webber suggested a cross section of the sloping of the two most adverse cut lots to give the Commission an indication of how much will be cut off the ridge. Mr. Shaw suggested a site line from Alessandro Road looking up at the proposed subdivision. Mr. Shaw suggested a continuation to February 22"d MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Thompson,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 February 22, 2005. Assistant Director Jaquess requested the applicant's concurrence with the continuation of the project for the record. Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 19 Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Thatcher concurred with the project continuance. Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES F. December 14, 2005 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Osborne, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Planning Commission minutes of December 14, 2004 with a correction noted. VI. CORRESPONDENCE/COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Report Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council actions of January 18, 2005. Commissioner Thompson left the meeting at 5:58 p.m. VII. ADJOURN TO FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Chairman Webber adjourned the meeting to February 8, 2005 at 5:59 p.m. Patti Ortiz, Senior Administrative Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of January 25, 2005 Page 20