HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 01-23-07_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday,
January 23, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows:
PRESENT: James Macdonald, Chairman
Carol M. Dyer, Commissioner
Paul Foster, Commissioner
Gary Miller, Commissioner
John James, Commissioner
Eric Shamp, Commissioner
ADVISORY STAFF
PRESENT: Jeff Shaw, Director
Robert Dalquest, Assistant Director
Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney
David Jump, Associate Planner
Tamara Alaniz, Assistant Planner
Joshua Altopp, 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
Cook.
Director Shaw stated that he would like to set something up for retiring Commissioner Tom Osborne, and
will be getting in touch with the Commission to set up a date and time to honor him. Director Shaw
welcomed Commissioner Carol Dyer to the Planning Commission.
II. CONSENT CALENDAR - NONE
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. TANDY HILL, APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ)
1. Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a
Negative Declaration.
2. Public hearing for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the
City Council on AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE REMOVAL NO. 116 on
approximately 12.43 acres (APN: 0294-091-39) located north of San Timoteo
Canyon Road and west of Alessandro Road in the A-1, Agricultural District.
3. Public hearing for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the
City Council on ZONE CHANGE NO. 428 from A-1, Agricultural District to R-R,
Rural Residential District and FP-1, Floodplain District on approximately 12.46
acres (APN: 0294-091-39, and 32) located north of San Timoteo Canyon Road
and west of Alessandro Road.
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Project Planner Tamara Alaniz stated that the project was continued from the meeting of December 12,
2006, and that the applicant's representative has requested an additional continuance to the February 27,
2007 meeting.
Chairman Macdonald asked if anyone in the audience wished to address the Commission. No comments
were forthcoming and Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Pagel
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission continue the Negative Declaration and the public hearing for Agricultural
Preserve Removal No. 116 and Zone Change No. 428 to the meeting of February 27, 2007.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. DOUG WILSON, APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ)
1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 900 - PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning
Commission to consider the occupancy of approximately 3,838 square feet of an
existing commercial center for a church located at 1902 Orange Tree Lane, Suite
#140, on the northwest corner of Orange Tree Lane and Nevada Street in
Specific Plan 25.
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Project Planner Tamara Alaniz gave a presentation on the proposed project. Staff recommended
approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Miller had concerns relative to amplified music that would be projected from the church
during services and asked how the noise would be controlled. Ms. Alaniz stated that the applicant was
available to address this issue.
Doug Wilson, applicant, stated that he would like to use the proposed facility for his church and indicated
that the music would not be disruptive to other businesses in the area.
Commissioner Miller had questions relative to the music and asked if there would be a band. Mr. Wilson
addressed Commissioner Miller's concerns.
Commissioner Miller asked staff if a condition of approval could be formulated to address the loudness of
the music coming from the church. Ms. Alaniz addressed Commissioner Miller's question.
Director Shaw referred to the City's Noise Ordinance and asked Assistant Director Bob Dalquest to give
an overview of the ordinance. Assistant Director Dalquest gave a brief overview of the ordinance and
stated that a condition could be added to address the Commissions concerns relative to noise levels.
Commissioner James stated that the existing Noise Ordinance would be sufficient.
Director Shaw stated that it was not unusual to have a church in an industrial area and the City has not
received complaints from other industrial tenants relative to noise coming from neighboring churches.
Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 900, subject to the following findings,
submitted plans, and attached conditions of approval:
a. The religious institution applied for at this location is permitted in any district, subject to approval
of a Conditional Use Permit.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 2
b. The religious institution at this location is necessary and desirable for the development of the
community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not
detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone.
C. The project site is sufficient in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, meets all
development standards and other features required in order to adjust the use to those existing or
permitted future uses on land in the neighborhood.
d. That the site for the religious institution relates to streets and highways properly designed and
improved to carry the type of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use. The
building to be utilized by the religious institution was originally designed to handle all traffic
generated by various uses allowed within the center.
e. The conditions for the proposed use are reasonably related to the proposed religious institution to
address potential effects of the proposed use, and are necessary to protect the public health,
safety, and general welfare and the best interests of the neighborhood.
Chairman Macdonald asked if a condition of approval needed to be added relative to noise.
Commissioner Miller stated that the Noise Ordinance would suffice.
B. AYRES HOTEL COMPANY, INC., APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: DAVID JUMP)
1. Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a Socio-Economic
Cost/Benefit Study.
3. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider VARIANCE NO.
736 a request to allow a variance from Section 18.168.220 of the Redlands
Municipal Code reducing the required 25-foot landscape setback from freeway
right-of-way to 11 feet, 7 inches for the Ayres Hotel located on the south side of
Colton Avenue approximately 150 feet west of New York Street within the C-M,
Commercial Industrial District.
4. Planning Commission to consider COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL
NO. 840 to establish a 52,158 square foot, two-story, 107 rooms Ayres Hotel on
a 2.66 acre parcel located on the south side of Colton Avenue approximately 150
feet west of New York Street within the C-M, Commercial Industrial District
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Project Planner David Jump gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed hotel. Staff
recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval and recommended that the
applicant return to the Planning Commission at a later date with alternative designs for the proposed
tower feature.
Commissioner Shamp asked if there was a graphic available that showed the relationship between the
freeway and the proposed site. Mr. Jump stated that a graphic was not available but referred to the site
plan on the PowerPoint presentation to address Commissioner Shamps question.
Commissioner Shamp asked if there was a controlled, signaled crosswalk at the intersection of Colton
and New York Street. Mr. Jump responded that there was a crosswalk at that intersection.
Commissioner Shamp had concerns that there would be more potential crossings at that intersection with
people going to restaurants across the street and would like to see a controlled crosswalk installed.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 3
Commissioner Dyer commented that she noticed that there were no sidewalks shown on the front of the
property. Director Shaw referred to Public Works condition of approval number thirteen (13) c., that
requires a sidewalk be installed along the frontage of the property.
Chairman Macdonald asked if any recommendations were made relative to the parallel parking and the
tower. Mr. Jump addressed Chairman Macdonald question.
Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was available to address the Commission.
Bruce D'Eliscu, applicant, thanked staff for their assistance on the project. He addressed the
Commission's concerns relative to traffic circulation, the crosswalk and parking, stating that these issues
could be remedied by adding conditions of approval.
Commissioner Miller had concerns relative to the design of the building, referring to the lack of
landscaping and parallel parking. He also commented on the tower, stairway, railings and pilasters,
indicating that enhancements were needed. Mr. D'Eliscu addressed Commissioner Miller's concerns.
Commissioner Miller had concerns relative to the size of the two foot planters on the finger islands and
stated that more planting was needed against the building. He suggested that stucco trim on the building
would be a longer lasting alternative than the proposed wood trim. Mr. D'Eliscu addressed
Commissioner Miller's concerns.
Commissioner Shamp supported Commissioner Miller's comments and stated that he would encourage
the consultants on the project to revisit the issue of putting landscaping against the building.
Commissioner Dyer supported Commissioner Miller's concerns relative to the finger planters stating that
they should be doubled in size. Commissioner Dyer commented on the compact car parking spaces in
the back of the site, stating that she likes to see compact spaces dispersed throughout the site. She
stated that the plants are small relative to the size of the buildings and would prefer plantings that would
provide more screening. Commissioner Dyer suggested flipping the parallel parking on the left side of the
site the opposite way.
Chairman Macdonald asked Commissioner Miller if he had suggestions relative to the tower treatment.
Commissioner Miller suggested moldings around the arch and ceramic tile murals for the interior.
Commissioner Miller reiterated that his biggest concern is the lack of landscaping between the driveway
and building. He suggested removing one row of units that would enable the applicant to resolve the
parallel parking and landscaping concerns.
Commissioner James supported the comments of the other Commissioners relative to the landscape
enhancements. He suggested using signage on all four sides of the tower.
Mr. D'Eliscu stated that he would like to move the project forward with the exception of the tower element
which he hoped to bring back to a future Planning Commission meeting as an addenda item.
Chairman Macdonald asked for a consensus of the Commission to continue this item.
Director Shaw stated that the project should be continued based on the broad number of issues raised by
the Commission. Staff recommended continuance to the February 27, 2007 meeting.
Mr. Jump indicated that a number of rooms would need to be eliminated to provide additional landscaping
and still meet the parking requirements and commented on the crosswalk. Commissioner Shamp stated
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 4
some kind of structure or appurtenances were needed to prevent people from crossing at the Colton and
New York Street intersection.
Chairman Macdonald asked the applicant if the continuance met with his approval. Mr. D'Eliscu stated
that he did not want a continuance and requested denial of the project.
Director Shaw stated that staff was not prepared to present a recommendation for denial. He
recommended continuing the item for thirty (30) days so that staff could resolve the issues raised by the
Commission.
Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
Chairman Macdonald asked staff if the project required a 6/7 vote for Alabama and Redlands Boulevard.
Mr. Jump stated that the traffic study determined that it was not necessary.
Commissioner Foster stated that he was disappointed in not moving forward with this project and had
hoped that the issues raised by the Commissioners could be worked out with staff.
Chairman Macdonald indicated that he was not concerned about the parallel parking.
Director Shaw appreciated Commissioner Dyer's suggestion relative to the flipping of the parallel parking.
Chairman Macdonald asked for a consensus relative to the parallel parking. Commissioner Foster was
not opposed to the parallel parking and like the idea of flipping it. Commissioners Dyer, James, Shamp
and Chairman Macdonald concurred. Commissioner James and Shamp concurred with Commissioner
Miller's concerns relative to the landscaping.
Commissioner Miller indicated that he would be comfortable moving the project forward providing eight of
the units were eliminated so that the planting and landscaping issues could be resolved.
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Mr. D'Eliscu indicated that he was not prepared to make a decision relative to eliminating eight units from
the site plan without discussing it with the rest of the owners.
Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 5-1 vote,
(Commissioner Foster opposed), to continue Variance No. 736 and Commission Review and Approval
No. 840 to the February 27, 2007 meeting.
C. TARA AND GREG FULLER, APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: JOSHUA ALTOPP)
1. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 899 to allow a children's fitness/education center to occupy
approximately 2,400 square feet in an existing commercial industrial center
located at 490 Alabama Street, Suite#106 in the `EV/IC', Commercial Industrial
District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan.
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 5
Project Planner Joshua Altopp gave a presentation on the proposed children's fitness center. Staff
recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval.
Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was available to address the Commission.
Tara Fuller, applicant, gave a brief overview of the proposed gym and was hopeful to use the space for
their facility.
Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 899 subject to the following findings,
submitted plans, and attached conditions of approval as follows:
a. The proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the
City. The proposed children's fitness center is a commercial use locating within the
newly constructed building at 490 Alabama Street, Suite #106. The new buildings
comply with the applicable land use plans of the City, thus ensuring that the proposed
children's fitness center will not affect the applicable land use plans of the City.
b. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare. The proposed children's fitness center is a small business operation confined to
within the tenant space in which it is located. There will be no outside affects on the
public and the type of operation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and
welfare.
C. The proposed development will comply to the maximum extent feasible with the
regulations of the City's General Plan, the applicable zoning district and the City's
development standards. The proposed use of a children's fitness center is a commercial
activity, the General Plan designation for the proposed location is Commercial Industrial,
the zoning designation for the proposed location is Commercial Industrial District of the
East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and the proposed project maintains the development
standards as required by the zone.
d. The proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location. The children's
fitness center is a commercial activity and being such is appropriate to be located within
an existing commercial industrial center.
D. CITICOM DEVELOPMENT L.P., APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: JOSHUA ALTOPP)
1. Planning Commission to consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. PUBLIC HEARING for Planning Commission to consider a Socio-Economic
Cost/Benefit Study.
3. Consideration of Commission Review and Approval No. 826 to develop a
commercial retail center consisting of two buildings with a combined floor area of
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 6
22,739 square feet on approximately 2.10 acres, located at the southeast corner
of Orange Tree Lane and California Street (A.P.N. 0292-061-23) in the EV/CG
General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan.
4. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider Conditional Use
Permit No. 885 to establish a drive-thru food establishment within a proposed
retail center located at the southeast corner of Orange Tree Lane and California
Street (A.P.N. 0292-061-23) in EV/CG General Commercial District of the East
Valley Corridor Specific Plan.
5. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider Variance No. 730
a Variance from Section 18.168.220 to reduce the required landscape setback
of twenty-five (25) feet for projects adjacent to freeway right-of-way along the
southern property line to be used for parking and trash enclosures located at the
southeast corner of Orange Tree Lane and California Street (A.P.N. 0292-061-
23) in the EV/CG General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor
Specific Plan.
Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing.
Project Planner Joshua Altopp gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project.
Staff recommended continuance of the project to the February 27, 2007 meeting to allow time for the
applicant to make the necessary revisions to the parking, parking stalls, roof screening, landscaping and
port-o-cochere.
Commissioner Dyer indicated that the landscape plan appeared different than the site plan presented by
staff. She commented on the lack of connection of the bikeway to the required bike rack and wanted to
see the patio area and landscaping enhanced. Commissioner Dyer also had concerns with the angled
parking and that the project did not appear to be pedestrian friendly.
Chairman Macdonald asked if there was discussion relative to moving the buildings to the front of the site
and locating the parking to the rear. Mr. Altopp stated that there was no discussion in changing the
placement of the buildings.
Chairman Macdonald asked if freeway signage would be allowed since food courts would be on site. Mr.
Altopp stated that freeway signage would be allowed.
Commissioner Miller commented that there were no diamond-shaped or triangular planters up against the
curb face. Mr. Altopp referred to the PowerPoint presentation and pointed out several of the required
planters on the site plan.
Commissioner Shamp asked if a measure was in place to protect pedestrian collisions at the corner of
Orange Tree Lane and California. Mr. Altopp indicated that there is a sidewalk against the street frontage
that is separate from the bike path. Commissioner Shamp's concerns were at the intersection where
pedestrians and bicycles enter the same piece of pavement. He stated that it would be appropriate to
provide signage or bollards that would encourage cyclists to stop and walk their bicycles at that location.
Commissioner Dyer asked about the process and maintenance for the landscape medians for California
Street. Mr. Altopp indicated that Public Works reviews the type of landscaping for the medians since they
are a public right-a-way. Director Shaw stated that the landscape pallet is already set for the median
through the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and maintenance is typically done through the Community
Facilities District(CFD).
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 7
John DeFrenza, architect for the project, thanked staff for their extra efforts relative to the project. He
addressed the diamond-shaped landscape fingers and concerns relative to the patio and parking areas.
Mr. DeFrenza commented on the diagonal parking, stating that they could change it to ninety degree
parking. He spoke of extending the screen wall on the drive aisle, leaving the solid portion of the wall,
and proposed to enhance the textural change by adding a hedge row for the remaining portion. Mr.
DeFrenza indicated that they have a deadline with tenant, Sit N' Sleep, and need to aggressively move
the project forward.
Mr. DeFrenza addressed the screening issue for the roof top mechanical units. Director Shaw stated that
staff was looking for a cross section based on freeway height that would ensure that the roof top
equipment is screened from the freeway.
Mr. DeFrenza indicated that they could do colored and patterned concrete in the patio area.
Chairman Macdonald had questions relative to the port-o-cochere. Mr.DeFrenza stated that they would
be building a trellis structure with a solid portion of roof over the drive-through window and would enhance
the legs of the structure with stone.
Commissioner Miller commented on the arches on the elevation and asked if they projected from the
surfaces. Mr. DeFrenza stated that the arches projected four inches from the surfaces and would have a
stucco reveal.
Commissioner Miller stated that he liked the project and is comfortable with the proposed location of the
buildings. He indicated that he had concerns relative to the two large stucco vertical surfaces and asked
if the applicant would consider enhancing them. Mr. DeFrenza indicated that they could do a patterning
on the stucco with more reveals that would break-up the large mass of stucco.
Commissioner Dyer commented that she would like to see plantings that would be more heat tolerant
than the plantings proposed.
Commissioner Shamp asked what type of glass would be used on the project. Mr. Defrenza stated that
clear, dual glazing would be used.
Commissioner Shamp commented on the two large vertical surfaces suggesting that tall landscaping
would be another acceptable solution to break up the large mass of stucco.
Director Shaw referenced the median aisle, stating that a condition of approval should be added requiring
the applicant to be responsible for entering into a Community Facilities District to maintain or participate in
the cost of maintaining that specific area. He asked the applicant if they would have objections adding a
condition of approval relative to this situation. Alan Stewart, General Partners for Citicom, asked Director
Shaw if this was done in the form of a bond. Director Shaw addressed Mr. Stewarts question stating that
the cost of the maintenance would be placed upon the property owners in the form of an annual property
tax. Mr. Stewart was agreeable to the condition of approval.
Chairman Macdonald asked for comments from the Commission.
Commissioner Shamp commented that he would like to see a hedge row rather than the proposed solid
wall. Commissioner Miller stated that he liked the wall just at the corner but after that he was fine with the
hedgerow.
Commissioner James stated that he supported the project as proposed.
Chairman Macdonald had concerns with the parking being nineteen spaces short. Commissioner Miller
concurred with Chairman Macdonald relative to the parking, stating that it could come into compliance by
removing food service uses not committed at this time.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 8
Director Shaw commented on the conditions of approval and the new issues raised by the Commission
and asked Mr. Altopp if there were other items discussed today that were not reflected in the conditions.
Mr. Altopp indicated that the port-o-cochere and landscaping would come back to the Planning
Commission as an addenda item.
Chairman Macdonald commented on the photo simulation for the roof top equipment. Director Shaw
stated that the condition of approval needs to be amended to require that all roof top equipment be
screened from freeway views and that instead of a photo simulation; a "cross section" view from the
freeway is needed.
Chairman Macdonald indicated that there was a comment in the staff report on several parking stalls
throughout the site not meeting code requirements and asked if the issue had been resolved. Mr. Altopp
addressed Chairman Macdonald's question relative to the parking.
Commissioner Shamp indicated that the compact parking stalls should be placed in the front of the site.
Mr. Altopp stated that the code requires compact spaces to be placed furthest away from the main
entrance.
Mr. DeFrenza addressed the compact and 90 degree parking issues stating that he was certain that he
could get all the parking spaces along that bottom row that are currently diagonal plus a few more. He
indicated that he could remove all of the compact spaces in the design.
Chairman Macdonald asked if Mr. DeFrenza could comply with the tree for every three spaces if the
diagonal spaces were eliminated. Mr.DeFrenza stated that he could comply.
Commissioner Shamp was in favor of approving the project with conditions.
Chairman Macdonald had concerns with the parking, indicating that it was not adequate. Mr. Stewart
asked Chairman Macdonald to reconsider his position relative to the parking.
Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing.
Chairman Macdonald asked what would happen to the final building relative to the retail space if two or
three food services were approved due to adequate parking. Mr. Altopp stated that staff could condition
that several of the food tenants would need to be retail.
Director Shaw stated that staff is comfortable with adding a condition indicating that all uses comply with
the parking standards of the code.
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 Variance No. 730, Conditional
Use Permit No. 885, and Commission Review & Approval No. 826 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 Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Variance No. 730,
Conditional Use Permit No. 885, and Commission Review & Approval No. 826 as it has been determined
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 9
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 Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission approve a reduced LOS at the intersections of Alabama Street/Redlands
Boulevard and California Street/Redlands Boulevard during the peak hours as permitted in General Plan
Policy 5.20(b).
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
the Planning Commission approve Variance No. 730 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. The property has an irregular shape with three street frontages making development
difficult;
2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right
possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone district, but which is denied to the
property in question. There are many other commercial developments in the vicinity and zone
that have been granted a variance from the required 25-foot landscaped setback;
3. That 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. Approval of the project will improve the
appearance of the property;
4. That the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of
Redlands. The project is consistent with the density limits of the General Plan.
MOTION
It moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the
Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 885 subject to the following findings,
submitted plans, and attached conditions of approval as follows:
1. The proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City.
The proposed drive-through is a commercial use locating within a new proposed shopping center
at the southeast corner of California Street and Orange Tree Lane. The new buildings will comply
with the applicable land use plans of the City, thus ensuring that the proposed drive-through will
not affect the applicable land use plans of the City.
2. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The
proposed drive-through is an accessory use related to a small business operation confined to
within the tenant space in which it is located. There will be no outside affects on the public and
the type of operation will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.
3. The proposed development will comply to the maximum extent feasible with the regulations of the
City's General Plan, the applicable zoning district and the City's development standards. The
proposed use of a drive-through is a commercial activity, the General Plan designation for the
proposed location is Commercial, the zoning designation for the proposed location is General
Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, and the proposed drive-through
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 10
maintains the development standards as required by the zone.
4. The proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location. The drive-through is a
commercial activity and being such is appropriate to be located within the proposed commercial
center.
This includes the additions and modifications to the conditions of approval as follows:
2. All plans submitted to the City shall reflect all Planning Commission and/or City Council
approvals and any other changes required by the Commission and/or staff. This
condition applies to site plans, landscape plans, elevations, grading, and all other
illustrations, text, or plans submitted to the City in connection with the project. The plans
being acted upon relate to the electronic version submitted by the applicant.
33. The details of the screen walls along the drive-through lane shall return to the Planning
Commission to be reviewed and considered with the landscape plan.
34. The applicant shall provide a phetesim cross-section plan from the freeway to
determine if the proposed parapets will be of sufficient height to screen the mechanical
equipment. The phstesim cross-section plan will also include mechanical equipment
located on the tenant suite located toward the front of Building 2.
38. The applicant shall enter into the CFD (Communities Facilities District) for the
maintenance of the median aisle.
39. Change to the angled parking at the southeast corner of the site to provide for
ninety(90) degree angled parking.
40. The project shall meet all parking code requirements.
41. The bike path is to be connected to the center patio.
Modifying conditions of approval numbers 2, 33 and 34 and adding conditions of approval numbers 38,
39, 40 and 41 was moved by Commissioner Miller seconded by Commissioner Foster and carried on a 6-
0 vote.
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 & Approval No. 826 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 proposed
commercial shopping center use because it complies with all property development
standards of the `EV/CG', General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific
Plan;
2. The site properly relates to California Street and Orange Tree Lane which are 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;
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 11
3. The Conditions of Approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 826 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 the General Plan Designation, Municipal Code requirements, and the
development standards of the `EV/CG', General Commercial District of the East Valley
Corridor Specific Plan.
This includes the amended and added conditions of approval as discussed previously.
V. ADDENDA
A. MICHELE MARIE QUIGLEY, APPLICANT
(PROJECT PLANNER: DAVID JUMP)
A hearing for the Planning Commission to review approved CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT No. 879 establishing a large family day care home to determine possible
impacts on the surrounding neighborhood at 1342 South Center Street within the R-E,
Residential Estate District.
Project Planner David Jump gave a brief overview relative to the operations of the day care center. Staff
recommended permanence of the conditional use permit for Mrs. Quigley's day care.
Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was available to address the Commission.
Michele Quigley, applicant, commented that she provided her phone number to her neighbors so that
they could contact her regarding any concerns about the day care facility and complied with the
recommendations from the Planning Commission relative to additional landscaping and parking.
MOTION
It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote that
no significant impacts have occurred on the surrounding neighborhood and that Conditional Use Permit
No. 879 be deemed appropriate and desirable within the City and no further action is required.
B. APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO FENCE COMMITTEE
Director Shaw stated as a result of Commissioner Osborne retiring from the Commission, there is a
vacancy on the Fence Committee. Chairman Macdonald stated that Commissioner James volunteered to
serve on the Fence Committee.
VI. MINUTES
A. JANUARY 9, 2007
It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 5-0 vote
(Commissioner Dyer abstained)to approve the minutes of January 9, 2007.
VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF JANUARY 16, 2007
Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council Actions of January 16, 2007.
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 12
VIII. ADJOURN TO FEBRUARY 13, 2007
Chairman Macdonald adjourned the meeting at 4:43 p.m. to February 13, 2007.
Christine Szilva Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director
Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department
Planning Commission Minutes of
January 23, 2007
Page 13