Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 10-10-06_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, October 10, 2006, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: James Macdonald, Chairman Thomas Osborne, Vice Chairman Paul Foster, Commissioner Gary Miller, Chairman Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner Ruth Cook, Commissioner ABSENT: John James, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Shaw, Director John Jaquess, Assistant Director Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney David Jump, Associate Planner Joshua Altopp, Assistant Planner Tamara Alaniz, Assistant Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Macdonald called the meeting to order. All Commissioners were present except Commissioner James. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. HEEMSTRA SIGNS, APPLICANT (JOSHUA ALTOPP, ASSISTANT PLANNER) Planning Commission to consider Commission Sign Review No. 315 for a four(4) foot tall monument sign with a sign area of 28 square feet for Orange Grove Business Park within the front yard setback at 310-390 Alabama Street, in EV/IC Commercial Industrial of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. B. CITY OF REDLANDS (MANUEL BAEZA, SENIOR PLANNER) Parcel Map No. 17558 — Request for Final Approval of Parcel Map No. 17558 (Minor Subdivision No. 289), located on the north side of San Bernardino, west side of Webster Street, and east side of Texas Street in the O, Open Land District. It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 5-0 vote to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Miller arrived at 2:01 p.m. III. OLD BUSINESS- NONE IV. NEW BUSINESS A. HOSSEIN AFSHARI, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: DAVID JUMP) 1. Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Pagel 2. PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission to consider a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 3. Planning Commission to consider COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 834 a medical office development consisting of three buildings totaling 122,604 square feet, two of the medical buildings will be single story comprising a total floor area of 19,752 square feet each with the third medical office building being two-story and consisting of a floor area of 83,100 square feet all occupying an 8.90 acre site located at the southwest corner of Alabama Street and Park Avenue within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan Industrial/Commercial District(EV/IC). Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner David Jump passed around colored renderings and a materials board to the Commission for their review. Mr. Jump gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. Staff recommended the approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was subject to the same requirements in the East Valley Corridor relative to one tree per three parking spaces and if that was met on the plans. Mr. Jump stated that one tree for every three parking spaces were met with the exception of the parking area facing Alabama Street which is addressed in the conditions of approval. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Hossein Afshari, applicant, was available for questions. Commissioner Osborne referred to the Building and Safety conditions of approval and had questions relative to the flood plain, asking what the effect of having to raise the pads two to four feet relative to building C. Mr. Afshari stated that the pad is already raised a foot to eighteen inches higher than the existing grade but that the engineer could raise it another foot if needed. Commissioner Osborne commented that Public Works did not make a condition relative to limiting left turns from the Alabama Street exit. Chairman Macdonald stated that traffic could turn on Park Avenue. Chairman Macdonald asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak. No comments were forthcoming and Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Commissioner Miller commented that this was a nice project that is well designed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Commission Review and Approval 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 Miler, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Commission Review and Approval 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. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 2 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve a reduced LOS at the intersection of Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard during the peak hours as permitted in General Plan Policy 5.20b and 5.20c. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve a reduced LOS at the intersection of California Street and Redlands Boulevard during the peak hours as permitted in General Plan Policy 5.20b and 5.20c. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No. 834 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 medical office building use because it will comply with all property development standards for the EV/IC zoning district including lot coverage, permitted uses, and required setbacks; 2. The site properly relates to Park Avenue and Alabama Street which will be designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed development because both streets will be constructed to city prescribed standards to their ultimate half widths through compliance with project conditions of approval and the applicant has been conditioned to perform other required street improvements which will benefit traffic movement and flow; 3. The Conditions of Approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 834 are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; 4. The use is desirable for the overall development of the community because the proposed project conforms with both the General Plan Designation and Specific Plan requirements regarding site design and permitted uses within the zoning district and site designation of commercial/industrial. B. ALAN RONSKA, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) 1. Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 312 amending Section 15.36.340 of the Redlands Municipal Code pertaining to allowable signs in the M-2, General Industrial District. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated that the project would be subject to the preparation of an initial study and a negative declaration since it is a legislative action. Staff is requesting a continuance to the November 14th meeting in order for the environmental analysis to occur. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Ordinance Text Amendment No. 312 to the meeting of November 14, 2006. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 3 C. JACQUE BILBEY, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: JOSHUA ALTOPP) 1. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 895 for the on-site sale of beer at the existing Redlands Shooting Park on a parcel totaling 10.4 gross acres located at 2125 Orange Street in the O, Open Space District. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Assistant Director John Jaquess stated that questions came up relative to how other shooting ranges operated in Southern California in terms of the sale of beer. Staff is doing research with the Police Department relative to the past history of this particular site since it previously had beer sales. Staff is asking for a two week continuance to the October 24th meeting in order to develop additional information. Chairman Macdonald asked if this was the range on the southern side of the river. Mr. Jaquess stated that it was the same shooting range. Chairman Macdonald asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to speak. No comments were forthcoming and Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue consideration of Conditional Use Permit No. 895 to October 24, 2006. D. JOHN HIEBERT, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: JOSHUA ALTOPP) 1. PUBLIC HEARING for a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 2. PUBLIC HEARING for MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 299 to subdivide Assessor Parcel Number 0172-321-43 totaling 68,591 square feet into two parcels one totaling 19,288 square feet with an existing house and the other parcel totaling 49,303 undeveloped vacant land within the R-S, Suburban Residential District located at 1107 Cypress Avenue. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Joshua Altopp gave a brief overview and PowerPoint presentation of the proposed project. Mr. Altopp stated that there was an issue relative to underground utilities and that the project will be required to underground all utilities on site as a condition of approval. He stated that the applicant has concerns with this particular condition and that he would like to address the issue with the Planning Commission. Staff recommended the proposed project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Miller asked if the applicant had to go thirty-five (35) feet east of the property line of parcel two, to135 feet west of their westerly property line. Mr. Altopp stated that the adjacent parcel is just to the right of the Casa de Leon tract and that the other adjacent power pole is approximately 135 feet beyond the western boundary of this particular project. Mr. Jaquess commented that there are no plans prepared by Edison at this time for the undergrounding and that staff is projecting what they see to be effective undergrounding. Mr. Jaquess stated that Edison's plans could differ from staffs projections. Commissioner Miller asked why the developer of Casa de Leon was not required to underground the pole that is in front of their property. Mr. Jaquess stated that staff did not research that point. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 4 Director Jeff Shaw pointed out that there are two other projects across the street that have the same conditions relative to undergrounding utilities. He stated that staff wants to check the conditions of approval for these projects to see if they were required to underground their utilities. Commissioner Miller referred to the Public Works condition relative to the storm drain and asked what the condition required. Commissioner Osborne commented that it was addressed under the Public Works condition of approval items sixteen (16)and seventeen (17). Commissioner Miller stated that the condition of approval does not state what Public Works is conditioning the applicant to do and asked if it was a pipe or open channel. Mr. Jaquess stated that it should be an enclosed pipe but that it was not for the whole length of the channel. He suggested that a representative from Public Works be contacted to clarify the condition for the Commission. Warren Tuttle, Tuttle Engineering, was available for questions. Commissioner Miller asked if the pipe was underground or was an open culvert. Mr. Tuttle stated that his client advised that very little water flows through that area and would like to do a good hydrology study on it to see if it warrants a pipe or a boxed culvert. Commissioner Shamp referred to parcel two on Clifton and asked if it was a pad or a retention basin. Mr. Altopp stated that it is a proposed pad. Mr. Tuttle stated that there has been confusion relative to the undergrounding of the utilities and that more time is needed to try to address the issue with the people across the street. Mr. Tuttle commented that running a line 135 feet to the west also entails going across the large open storm drain ditch which is something that he feels this one subdivision should not have to address at this time. Director Shaw asked how much time Mr. Tuttle needed to resolve the issue and stated that staff is recommending a ninety(90) day extension relative to the Permit Streamlining Act issue. Mr. Tuttle stated that two weeks would be fine to settle the issue with the property owners. Chairman Macdonald asked for the dates of the continuance. Mr. Altopp stated that the two dates are January 8, 2007 for the Permit Streamlining Act issue and October 24th for the next Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Macdonald asked what needed to be done on the January 8th date. Mr. Jaquess stated it was for granting an extension of time for compliance with the Permit Streamlining Act. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Commissioner Cook asked if we were asking the applicant to cover the ditch or to provide drainage from across the street. Mr. Jaquess stated that the way the condition was written, it appears to give the City Engineer some flexibility in making a determination on the level of improvements required but only to the portion on Mr. Hiebert's property. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission grant an extension of time for Minor Subdivision No. 299 as provided for in the Permit Streamlining Act to January 8, 2007. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study and Minor Subdivision No. 299 to the meeting of October 24, 2006. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 5 E. HANNA AND GLORIA TAFESH, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) 1. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider MINOR COMMISSION APPROVAL NO. 36, a request to grant a modification from Section 18.20.130 regarding the required front yard setback for residences within the A-1, Agricultural District, specifically to allow a 2.5-foot reduction in the required 25-foot front yard on the northeast side of a proposed single family residence located on the north side slope between San Timoteo Canyon Road and Ladera Street(APN:0293-082-03). Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz gave a brief presentation on the proposed ten percent reduction of the front yard setback. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was available to address the Commission. Dawn Cheyovich, representing the applicant, was available to answer questions. No comments were forthcoming and Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Osborne, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Commission Approval No. 36 subject to the following findings and attached conditions of approval: 1. That the proposed ten percent (10%) reduction of the required front yard setback meets the set criteria under Section 18.196.130 of the Redlands Municipal Code and is determined to be in the public interest and proper to accommodate the proposed residence; 2. That the reduction of the required front yard will not impact or be detrimental to the immediate uses or existing uses or uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed yard modification is to be located; 3. That the proposed reduction in the required front yard is necessary and desirable for the proper development of the project site and is in harmony with the goals and policies of the General Plan; and, 4. That the conditions set forth in the permit and shown on the approved plans are necessary to protect the public health, safety, or general welfare. V. ADDENDA - None Assistant Director John Jaquess introduced Project Planner Tamara Alaniz to the Commission. VI. MINUTES A. September 26, 2006 It was moved by Commissioner Osborne, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 6-0 vote to approve the minutes of September 26, 2006. Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 6 VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF OCTOBER 3, 2006 Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council Actions of October 3, 2006. VIII. ADJOURN TO OCTOBER 24, 2006 Chairman Macdonald adjourned the meeting at 2:46 p.m. to October 24, 2006. Christine Szilva Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of October 10, 2006 Page 7