Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-10-05_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, May 10, 2005, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: George Webber, Chair James Macdonald, Vice-Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Caroline Laymon, Commissioner Gary Miller, Commissioner Thomas Osborne, Commissioner Paul Thompson, Commissioner ABSENT: ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Shaw, Director John Jaquess, Assistant Director Dan Mc Hugh, City Attorney Robert Dalquest, Principal Planner/Project Manager Asher Hartel, Senior Planner Manuel Baeza, Associate Planner David Jump, Junior Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Webber opened the public hearing at 2:00 p.m. All Commissioners were present except Commissioner Miller. Chairman Webber advised members of the audience that parking passes are available from the Planning Commission Secretary for those who are parked in the Civic Center parking lot. II. CONSENT ITEM(S)- NONE III. OLD BUSINESS - NONE IV. NEW BUSINESS A. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 801 - Consideration by the Planning Commission on a Mitigated Negative Declaration,a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and Planning Commission consideration of a Commission Review and Approval for the construction of a 699,350 square foot concrete tilt-up building for a regional distribution center on approximately 32.11 acres located on the west side of Marigold Avenue at the terminus of Palmetto Avenue in Concept Plan No.2 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by AMB PROPERTY CORPORATION. (PROJECT Planner: Bob Dalquest) Project Planner Bob Dalquest stated that staff is requesting additional time to complete their review of the proposed project with the concurrence of the applicant. Mr. Dalquest requested the proposed project be continued to May 24, 2005. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Pagel MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Laymon and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Socio Economic Cost/Benefit Study and Commission Review and Approval No. 801 to May 24, 2005. Commissioner Miller arrived at 2:03 p.m. B. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 802 - Consideration by the Planning Commission on a Mitigated Negative Declaration,a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and Planning Commission consideration of a Commission Review and Approval for the phased construction of a 1,313,470 square foot concrete tilt-up building for a regional distribution center on approximately 60.32 acres located on the northwest corner of San Bernardino Avenue and California Street in Concept Plan No. 2 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by AMB PROPERTY CORPORATION. (Project Planner: Bob Dalquest) Project Planner Bob Dalquest gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Dalquest stated the proposed project was sent to the Stated Clearinghouse for a 30-day review by appropriate state agencies. Mr. Dalquest stated the review period ends June 2, 2005. Mr. Dalquest stated a scoping meeting was held as required by CEQA. Mr. Dalquest stated the only comments received were from the City of Loma Linda, relative to their concerns on the intersection at California Street and Redlands Boulevard. Mr. Dalquest requested the proposed project be continued to June 14th in order to address the following: 1. Prepare a site plan for Phase I improvements 2. Provide revised building elevations addressing the recommended architectural enhancements for the north, south, and east elevations, and 3. Provide revised landscape plans addressing the recommended issues using a larger scale Commissioner Miller stated in the original Specific Plan, the intersections called for a feature landscaped intersection, however it appeared it was not installed due to a major Southern California Edison easement. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Pat Meyer, representing the applicant, stated he concurs with staff's recommendations with regard to the additional landscape and architectural enhancements. Mr. Meyer stated the initial plans included corner monumentations however Southern California Edison (SCE) required the applicant to remove everything within the corridor because SCE uses large trucks to spray the towers along the corridor. Mr. Meyer stated they had to reduce the berming and they were not allowed to have anything but turf planted in the tower corridor (easement). Mr. Meyer stated the corner monument was included in the initial Concept Plan, however the final drawings reflected SCE's requirement relative to removal of the corner monuments. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 2 Commissioner Miller stated there is no indication of plant material other than the tree and he asked Mr. Meyer to consider plant materials in addition to trees. Commissioner Miller requested that vines be planted on the wrought iron to conceal the view of the backs of the trucks. Commissioner Miller asked for a section on the vegetative swale so the Commission can understand how it will be constructed and an explanation from the architect on how the landscape materials are going to survive under water. Chairman Webber asked the project architect to address the Commission. Mr. Bob Jacob, HPA Architect, stated they look forward to working with staff to resolve the issues on the north, south, and east elevations. Mr. Jacob stated the north and south elevations were broken up by adding a large element. Mr. Jacob stated they will add 3 elements along the long expansive elevations on California Street (similar to the Salton project) and they are open to suggestions from the Commission. Commissioner Miller suggested the applicant consider the center elements be on a larger scale than the other two elements. Commissioner Laymon concurred with Commissioner Miller. Commissioner Laymon noted on several of the projects that have been approved in the past, the architectural enhancements look good but do not seem to translate well once the building is completed. Chairman Webber stated he feels each approved project should be better than the projects that were previously approved. Chairman Webber stated he felt the corner elements were plain and could use more vertical treatment and on the front element he would like additional treatment. Chairman Webber stated the landscaping seems to be going in the right direction with one exception. Commissioner Miller requested a legend to indicate the colors to be used on the elevations. Commissioner Miller stated there is a large planter located at the drives entering on California Street and he felt there is an opportunity to provide trees in the hatched area inside the wrought iron fence. Chairman Webber stated it seems that the melaluca seems to be the right tree to be located next to the buildings, and break up the large building facade. Chairman Webber stated however it appears that there are not the required number of trees in the employee parking lot for the Hershey development. Chairman Webber stated the purple plum tree shown on the plans is not on the Fast Growing Shade Tree List for Parking Lots. Chairman Webber stated he would like to see trees other than the Liquid Amber trees. Mr. Dalquest asked for comments on the entry feature at Palmetto and California Street. Chairman Webber stated he would like to have the feature on the southwest corner. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 3 Commissioner Miller suggested there be some documentation from SCE confirming that the items requested by the Commission could not be done for reasons out of the applicant's control. Mr. Dalquest stated that would not effect this entry; the SCE easement is on Palmetto and California Street. Chairman Webber requested a motion for continuance. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Socio Economic Cost/Benefit Study,and Commission Review and Approval No.802 to the June 14,2005 meeting. Commissioner Macdonald noted there is in industrial park in Riverside where the buildings have a lot of bright colors that are really attractive. Commissioner Osborne stated it is his opinion that if buildings are of low to medium height, it is very attractive, however with taller buildings the color is over-powering. C. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 105 - Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Negative Declaration,and a PUBLIC HEARING for a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Commercial to Commercial/Industrial on approximately 9.5 acres located on the east side of Nevada Street, immediately south of the Atchison,Topeka, and Santa Fe railway and 122 feet north of Redlands Boulevard. Request submitted by MKJ-MCCALLA INVESTMENTS, LLC. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) D. SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 40 (AMENDMENT NO. 30) - Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and a PUBLIC HEARING for an amendment to the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan changing the zoning on approximately 9.5 acres located on the east side of Nevada Street, immediately south of the Atchison,Topeka,and Santa Fe railway and 122 feet north of Redlands Boulevard from the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to EV/IC, Industrial Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Request submitted by MKJ-MCCALLA INVESTMENTS,LLC. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) E. COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 796- Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration, a PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study, and Consideration of a Commission Review and Approval to develop an eight (8) building business park development with a combined building area of 135,570 square feet on approximately 9.5 acres located on the east side of Nevada Street, immediately south of the Atchison,Topeka,and Santa Fe railway and 122 feet north of Redlands Boulevard in the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan (proposed EV/IC, Industrial Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan). Request submitted by MKJ-MCCALLA INVESTMENTS, LLC. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) Project Planner Manuel Baeza stated the applicant requested the proposed project be continued to May 24t" Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 4 MOTION it was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Negative Declaration, Socio Economic Cost/Benefit Study, General Plan Amendment No. 105, Specific Plan No. 40 (Amendment 30), and Commission Review and Approval No. 796 to May 24, 2005. F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.825- PUBLIC HEARING for a Conditional Use Permit for the development of a 13,650 square foot drug store with drive through pharmacy on a 0.85 acre property located on the southeast corner of Lugonia Avenue and Church Street in the C-2, Neighborhood Convenience Center District. Request submitted by REALTY BANCORP EQUITIES/DENNIS D. JACOBSEN FAMILY HOLDINGS II, LLC. (Project Planner: Manuel Baeza) Project Planner Manuel Baeza stated during staff's analysis of the proposed project it was determined that a variance would be necessary to allow an architectural feature to encroach into the front yard setback. Mr. Baeza stated there was not sufficient time to notice the variance, therefore the applicant requested that the proposed project be continued to May 241H Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Miller,and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Socio Economic Cost/Benefit Study and Conditional Use Permit No. 825 to May 24, 2005. Commissioner Laymon recused herself at 2:50 p.m.due to a conflict of interest with items IV-G through IV-N and stated that she might be absent during the reading of item IV-O, which will be continued. G. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 104 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on an Agricultural Preserve Removal on 30.4 gross acres on property located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue,and west of Judson Street in the A-1,Agricultural District.Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) H. ZONE CHANGE NO. 396 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Zone Change from A-1, Agricultural District to R-E, Residential Estate District on three(3)contiguous parcels totaling 30.4 gross acres located north of San Bernardino Avenue, south of Pioneer Avenue, and west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 809 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development (PRD)on 30.4 gross acres consisting of 75 residential lots and three(3)common lots located north of San Bernardino Avenue,south of Pioneer Avenue,and west of Judson Street in the A-1,Agricultural District. Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT.(Project Planner: Asher Hartel) J. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16465-PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 30.4 gross acres into 75 residential lots and three(3) Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 5 common lots located north of San Bernardino Avenue,south of Pioneer Avenue,and west of Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) K. AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 105 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on an Agricultural Preserve Removal on 12.1 gross acres on property located at the southeast corner of Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street in the A-1, Agricultural District. Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) L. ZONE CHANGE NO. 399-PUBLIC HEARING forthe Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Zone Change from A-1, Agricultural District to R-E, Residential Estate District on 12.1 gross acres located at the southeast corner of Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street in the A-1,Agricultural District(Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) M. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 819 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development(PRD)on 12.1 gross acres consisting of 33 residential lots and one (1)common lot located at the southeast corner of Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street in the A- 1, Agricultural District (Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) N. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16627 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 12.1 gross acres into 33 residential lots and one (1) common lot located at the southeast corner of Pioneer Avenue and Judson Street in the A-1,Agricultural District(Proposed R-E Residential Estate District). Request submitted by WALTON DEVELOPMENT. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) Project Planner Asher Hartel gave a brief presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Hartel stated that an Environmental Impact Report(EIR)for the project was completed by the Chambers Group. Mr.Hartel stated that a representative from the Chambers Group would be available be answer questions regarding the EIR later during the meeting. Mr. Hartel stated the preparation of the EIR began in September 2004,a draft EIR was completed in January 2005, and the public review and comment period ended February 28, 2005. Mr. Hartel stated the EIR identifies 23 mitigation measures. Mr. Hartel stated the Kangaroo Rat habitat accounts for the majority of the open space area. Mr.Hartel stated the project lacks the 20%landscaped and recreational open space that is required for a Planned Residential Development(PRD), as staff does not agree with counting the habitat area as the required open space. Mr. Hartel stated that Redlands Airport is located approximately'/2 mile to the northeast. Mr. Hartel stated the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) designates the site as being in Airport Zones C and B2. Mr. Hartel stated that Conditions of Approval require an Avigation Easement over all lots as well as a deed notice for all the properties to disclose the proximity of the Airport. Mr. Hartel stated the issues and concerns expressed for Tentative Tract No. 16465 are the same for Tentative Tract No. 16627. Mr. Hartel stated raised concerns include recreational open space, side yard setback Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 6 issues, and Redlands Airport considerations. Mr. Hartel stated that both projects lack landscape plans; the applicant will submit the required plans after the issues have been resolved. Mr. Hartel stated staff is seeking direction from the Commission on the appropriate zoning for the area that is located within the B2 Airport Zone. Mr. Hartel stated the proposed project should be reviewed with regard to similar PRD projects that have been recently reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Hartel stated the projects include the Naftali, Ryland Homes,and KB Homes projects. Mr. Hartel stated there are issues relative to lot sizes, dimensions, side yard setbacks, open space, street scape variations, building heights, and landscaping. Mr.Hartel stated both staff and the applicant are seeking direction from the Commission on the appropriate PRD requirements before a redesign of the project. Mr. Hartel requested the proposed project be continued to June 14tH Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Mr. Everett Hughes, applicant, stated that he has been working with staff for approximately 2.5 years. Mr. Hughes stated it is his belief that he meets the City's Open Space standards(Section.18.14.20). Mr. Hughes stated the kangaroo rat habitat is a conservation easement which is one of four items listed under the open space standards. Mr. Hughes stated he has been working with the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain a permit. Mr. Pat Meyer, Urban Environs, stated the Kangaroo rat has been found on Mr. Hughes' properties and in other areas that were not thought to be conducive to their survival. Mr. Meyer stated he met with an Airport Advisory group that expressed concerns on the impacts of Mr. Hughes property. Mr. Meyer stated that Mr. Hughes' project is consistent with the General Plan and the current Airport Plan. Mr. Meyer stated they are looking for direction from the Commission before they begin a redesign of the project to comply with open space requirements. Mr. Meyer stated that Mr. Hughes' project is similar to the Ryland Homes project that was recently approved. Mr. Meyer stated they believe their project(single family residential detached homes on large lots) is consistent with the area. Mr. Meyer stated the homes would be maintained by a homeowners'association or a lighting and landscape district paid for by the homeowners. Commissioner Osborne asked how the kangaroo rat habitat would be maintained. Mr. Meyer stated an entity familiar with this type of maintenance would be hired with input from the Department of Fish and Wildlife as to how the habitat would be maintained. Chairman Webber stated he feels there should be something stronger than a homeowners association to maintain the properties. City Attorney Dan Mc Hugh stated that staff will speak with the Department of Fish and Wildlife to determine if CC&R's are the appropriate enforcement mechanism for maintenance of the properties. Commissioner Macdonald asked if the Kangaroo rat habitat that is being set aside is part of the required 20% PRD open space. Commissioner Macdonald noted that the habitat will be fenced off and not available to the residents of the PRD. Mr. Meyer concurred. Mr. Meyer stated that they would like to listen to the Commission's comments relative to B2 and C Zones before redesigning the project. Mr. Meyer stated that Mr. Hughes will probably ask that 20 acres be removed Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 7 from the gross site area although it will be set aside for habitat area. Mr. Meyer stated they will provide recreational opportunities based on the remaining area. Mr. Eric Paul, 939 E. Brockton Avenue, stated he is a retired airline captain who has been a regular user of Redlands Airport since 1967. Mr. Paul stated if residential development is allowed adjacent to the airport,the "choking of Redlands Airport"will begin. Mr. Paul stated that airports are usually built on the outskirts of town or in remote areas where there is plenty of open space and residents are not bothered by the noise. Mr. Paul read a list of remote airports that have had flight, noise, and curfew restrictions placed on them. Mr. Paul stated there have been at least 20 off-field landings or crashes within a mile of the airport in the past 20 years. Mr. Paul stated that is one of the reasons not to build houses around the airport. Mr. Paul stated that Redlands Airport currently has no restrictions, however that will change with the proposed development. Mr. Paul asked the Commission to deny the project. Mr. Bob Pearce, 1320 Knoll Drive,Airport Advisory Board Chairman,stated the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP)addresses four major items: A. Safety for aircraft and the land in and around the airport B. Noise C. Overflights D. Hazards Mr. Pearce stated the proposed development is consistent with the ALUCP, however the ALUCP does not address the current practice relative to the location of the helicopter pad or its flight pattern. Mr. Pearce stated this is due to subsequent regulatory direction from the FAA and Cal Trans Division of Aeronautics directing the City not to locate the helicopter pad on the north side of the runway as proposed in the current ALUCP. Mr. Pearce stated under the California Land Use Planning Handbook, noise in rural areas should have a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of +10 added to the overlays due to its area. Mr. Pearce stated the use of the B2 Zone is approximately 1,500 feet from the center line of the runway to the project B2 line. Mr. Pearce stated if the proposed project is continued, this information should be included in Planning Commission packet. Mr. Pearce requested a reduction in the housing density proposed in the C Zone and requested that the proposed project be continued to determine if open space requirements have been met under the 15% open space requirements and if the open space proposed in the C Zone meets the definition of Open Space consistent with the Redlands Airport Land Use Plan 3.2.5 (a-e). Mr. Pearce summarized a letter submitted by Mr. John James, who was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Pearce stated he believes the EIR should have related the accident rates that were developed by the University of California for Cal Trans Division of Aeronautics. Commissioner Osborne asked Mr. Shaw if the approved Redlands ALUCP is consistent with the General Plan. Mr. Shaw stated the ALUCP is a component of the General Plan and they are internally consistent. Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 8 Mr. Bill Ingraham, 734 Michael, County Director of Airports,stated it is critical that the uses of Zone B not be mixed with the uses of Zone C. Mr. Ingraham stated the ALUCP recommends a density of(six)6 dwelling units per acre in Zone C, however the development proposes a higher density. Mr. Ingraham stated he believes it is bad advice not to follow the ALUCP. Mr.George Lessard,Airport Advisory Board,stated he was Chairman of the Airport Advisory Board at the time that they were trying to work with the City on the development of the Sports Park. Mr. Lessard stated he and other Board members tried to move the helicopter pattern to the north side because they felt the Sports Park was an appropriate use of the area between Judson Street, Wabash, and San Bernardino Avenue. Mr. Lessard stated the Airport Advisory Board never made a recommendation to move the B2 Zone; it was done entirely by City staff. Mr. Lessard stated he has worked with Mr. Pearce and others to try to have the airport in a stable position. Mr. Lessard stated the City administration has taken a position that the airport is an important asset to the City. Mr. Lessard stated that helicopters flying out from the east end of the airport do not attain their full altitude at 500 feet. Mr. Lessard stated the FAA denied a request to move the helicopter pattern to the north side in 2000. Mr Lessard stated it was a mistake to move the B2 Zone and it is not appropriate to put residential in the B2 Zone. Chairman Webber called a short recess. Commissioner Cook left the meeting. Chairman Webber reconvened the meeting. Commissioner Macdonald asked how the noise measurements are made relative to the planes and helicopters flying on a regular basis. Mr. Fred Olmos, Chambers Group, stated a combined aircraft noise and traffic study was conducted and it was determined to be less than significant. Mr.Olmos stated that helicopter noise,which comes and goes,is considered to be a temporary, less than significant impact. Mr.Olmos stated he did not recall if a helicopters analysis was conducted.Commissioner Thompson asked if a 24 hour analysis was taken. Mr.Olmos stated he did not know. Chairman Webber stated they should have someone present who does know. Mr. Shaw requested the noise sub-consultant attend a future meeting. Chairman Webber stated he would like to know how helicopters flying over the B2 Zone would impact the development and the area south of the development. Commissioner Osborne suggested the sub-consultant answer questions relative to current and projected helicopter operations. Commissioner Miller stated there is a ranking that if noise occurs less frequently it is categorized as less significant than if it occurs with regularity. Mr. Olmos stated that CEQA has thresholds for CNEL that determine the level of significance. Commissioner Miller noted that how often a noise occurs is one of the factors included in determining a final impact. Commissioner Thompson stated if a significant noise event occurs at night, it is given more weight than an event that occurs during the day. Mr. Shaw stated he feels a noise specialist would respond better to the questions. Commissioner Thompson suggested the specialist be able to present the information in "lay"terms. Mr.Shaw stated you can have a noise that is irritating to residents that does not meet a level considered to be "significant' by CEQA. Chairman Webber asked the Commission members for their thoughts on the appropriateness of the area Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 9 being developed as a residential use. Commissioner Osborne stated the General Plan shows the designation as very low density residential(0-2.7 units per acre)or alternative zone designations of A-1, RR and the A-2 zone that would be consistent with the General Plan designation. Mr.Shaw stated in 2000,the ALUCP was amended and the B-2 zone was moved upwards 1,000 feet north of San Bernardino Avenue. Commissioner Miller stated the B2 Zone was moved with an understanding that the helicopter area would be moved to the north side of the airport. Commissioner Miller stated he understands that there was a verbal discussion with an agency, but nothing official was established. Mr. Pearce stated the FAA letter recommended that the zone not be changed. Mr. Pearce stated the B-2 Zone is.5 units per parcel. Mr.Jaquess stated that was incorrect; it means one(1)house per two acre parcel. Mr. Shaw stated that he had not seen the letter but he had spoken with Tom Fujiwara (Public Works Department)who indicated that there had been some discussion but there was not a formal denial. Mr.Shaw indicated that he would look into this matter. Commissioner Miller stated he is inclined to stay with a density that is close to B2 Zone due to the fact that the change happened because the Airport wanted to accommodate the Sports Park with the understanding that they would be able to change the helicopter flight pattern, when needed. Commissioner Macdonald stated moving the B2 Zone line to the north, allowed the Sports Park to be considered with the open space necessary for emergency landings, however if development is allowed in the area they won't have a place to land. Mr.Jaquess stated the ALUCP indicates the number of people in the B2 Zone is 90 people per acre,and the number of people in the C Zone is 150 people per acre. Mr. Shaw stated it was anticipated that the density would be greater than 90 people where the ballfields and stadium seating were located. Chairman Webber stated he concurred with Commissioner Miller that the zoning should be at the B2 Zone density, which is one (1) unit per two(2)acres. Commissioner Thompson concurred and stated although the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, the Airport is too big an asset to the City to allow re-zoning to a higher density. Commissioner Macdonald concurred with Commissioners Miller and Thompson and stated he believes the zoning should remain as is. Commissioner Osborne concurred with the previous discussion. Chairman Webber stated it is the consensus of the Commission that the use of the land should be consistent with the B2 Zone (1 unit per 2 acres). Chairman Webber asked Mr. Meyer if he would like the Commission to comment on other issues, or if he would prefer to make a recommendation for a continuance. Mr. Hughes stated the action that the Commission has decided to take is inappropriate and may be illegal. Mr. Hughes stated the Commission recently approved a subdivision that is currently under construction,in the vicinity of his proposed project, that is exactly like his property. Mr. Hughes stated the difference from San Bernardino Avenue is identical to his property and to say that it is different because it is 600 feet from the Airport begs the issue. Mr. Hughes stated they have submitted a plan that is in accordance with the City's zoning standards. Mr. Hughes stated they have a disagreement relative to the issue of what constitutes open space, but they came prepared to work out that issue. Mr. Hughes stated they did not come here to have an action taken that is contrary to the City's General Plan, City zoning, and all other standards of the City. Mr. Hughes stated it appears to him that a special interest in the City,the Airport, has taken over their objectivity. Mr. Hughes stated that the Airport demonstrated that it is a financial drain on the City,they indicated that they Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 10 operate with no restrictions or restraints,yet they are in a discussion that moves everything backwards in time and disallows their property rights, and is not appropriate. Chairman Webber stated the citizens of the City have a right to be concerned about the project and its future impact on the Airport. Chairman Webber stated they made a point about the helicopters being to close to the houses. Mr. Hughes stated the helicopters are supposed to maintain a certain flight pattern and they should correspond to that flight pattern. Mr. Hughes stated the City takes appropriate steps to zone the property, they purchased the property after checking all established City standards and were assured they could develop. Mr. Hughes stated it appears the Commission is going to roll everything back to the way it was in 1999 and that does not make sense. Mr. Hughes stated they want their property to be judged on the basis of its merits,on the present zoning,as their application has been deemed complete but they cannot allow this to occur without emphasizing their concern. Commissioner Thompson asked the City Attorney if the zone change is denied would they be violating the applicant's General Plan property rights for development. City Attorney McHugh stated his opinion would be no; if the Commission wishes to recommend to the City Council denial of the zone change they are within their rights. Mr. Meyer stated out of courtesy to Mr. Hughes, he believe they owe him the respect to give him a 30 day continuance to the June 14th meeting. Mr. Meyer stated they would like to meet with staff and determine if the project is doable, but there is no sense in dealing with the other issues at this time. Commissioner Macdonald stated it may be a good idea to discuss the other issues so that they can work on them, such as the PRD open space issue. Chairman Webber stated it will be good to hear from the noise consultant. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne,seconded by Commissioner Thompson, and carried on a 5-0 vote (Commissioners Laymon and Cook absent)that the Planning Commission continue items IV-G though IV-N to the Planning Commission meeting of June 14, 2005. Commissioner Laymon returned to the meeting at 4:43 p.m. O. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.855-PUBLIC HEARING forthe Planning Commission to consider a Conditional Use Permit for an irrigation pond of approximately one(1)acre in size and a pump house building of 1,200 square feet located in the northeastern area of the golf course at Redlands Country Club, 1749 Garden Street in the R-A Residential Estate District. Request submitted by REDLANDS COUNTRY CLUB. (Project Planner: Asher Hartel) Project Planner Asher Hartel stated there was a problem relative to the appropriate noticing for the project, therefore staff is requesting the proposed project be continued to June 14th. Chairman Webber opened the public hearing. Seeing no comments forthcoming, Chairman Webber closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller,seconded by Commissioner Macdonald,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Conditional Use Permit No. 855 to the June 14th Planning Commission meeting. V. ADDENDA Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 11 A. REVIEW OF APPLICATION FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN OFF-SALE GENERAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE FOR REDLANDS MINI MART LOCATED AT 402 EAST REDLANDS BOULEVARD. Assistant Director Jaquess stated staff recommends the transfer be approved. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald,seconded by Commissioner Thompson,and carried on a 5-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the fiduciary transfer of the Off-Sale General License for Redlands Mini Mart and no conditions are recommended to be added as there are no problems associated with this facility. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. April 26, 2005 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald, and carried on a 5-0 vote (Commissioner Laymon abstaining) that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of April 26, 2005, with corrections noted. VII. DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL LAND USE ACTIONS OF MAY 3, 2005 Mr. Shaw gave a brief summary on the City Council actions of May 3rd VIII. ADJOURN TO MAY 24, 2005 Chairman Webber adjourned the meeting to May 24th at 4:48 p.m. Patti Ortiz, Senior Administrative Assistant Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Community Development Department Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of May 10, 2005 Page 12