Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 02-13-07_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, February 13, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: James Macdonald, Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Carol M. Dyer, Commissioner Paul Foster, Commissioner Gary Miller, Vice Chairman John James, Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Shaw, Director Robert Dalquest, Assistant Director Dan McHugh, City Attorney Manuel Baeza, Senior 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. A. ELECTION OF COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR Chairman Macdonald opened up nominations for Planning Chairman. It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Foster and carried unanimously to re-elect Jim Macdonald as Planning Commission Chairman. It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried unanimously to elect Gary Miller as Vice Chairman. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLIVE PETERS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) 1. Consideration of a TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16816 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. 2. Consideration of a TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 843 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. B. Planning Commission review of application for the person to person transfer of an On- Sale Beer and Wine license for Papaya Bay restaurant located at 623 Orange Street. C. Planning Commission review of application for the person to person transfer of an Off- Sale General Alcohol Beverage license for Redlands Mini Mart located at 402 E. Redlands Boulevard. It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 7-0 vote to approve the Consent Calendar. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 1 III. OLD BUSINESS A. REDLANDS COMMERCE CENTER, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) 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. Consideration of Commission Review and Approval No. 835 to develop a thirteen (13) building commercial center with 165,350 square feet of floor area on approximately 12.9 acres located on the north side of San Bernardino Avenue, south side of Pioneer Avenue, immediately west of the 210 Freeway in the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. 4. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider Minor Subdivision No. 303 (Tentative Parcel Map No.18311) to subdivide 12.9 acres into airspace lots for office condominium purposes for a proposed commercial center located on the north side of San Bernardino Avenue, south side of Pioneer Avenue, immediately west of the 210 Freeway in the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Revised conditions of approval were distributed to the Planning Commissioner's at the start of the meeting. Project Planner Manuel Baeza gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Mr. Baeza advised the Commission that the Southern Live Oak trees shown in the staff report should be changed from 24" to 36" box trees and also amended condition of approval eighteen (18) h. Staff found that the specific concerns of the Commission were addressed by the applicant and recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Foster asked if the trees shown in the PowerPoint presentation would act as a screening device for the project and if there was affirmation that the trees would remain there. Mr. Baeza stated that he did not know if the trees would remain since they were located in the Caltrans right-a-way. Commissioner Dyer had concerns that Caltrans would thin out or demolish the landscaping. Director Shaw stated that staff has no control on what is in Caltrans jurisdiction but that Caltrans sometimes notifies staff of changes that will occur along the freeway right-a-way. Commissioner Foster had concerns that the mechanical units on top of the building would be visible if the trees were removed by Caltrans and that action is needed to ensure that the units would be screened appropriately. Director Shaw stated that staff prefers to see the screening done with the use of parapets. Commissioner Dyer asked if the permeable concrete on the westerly side of the site was being used for drainage purposes. Director Shaw stated that the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) requires the first flush to be retained on site and that the permeable concrete allows the water to soak into the ground. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Greg Butcher, representing Armstrong Butcher Properties, stated that the project was very unique for the site. They concurred with the conditions of approval and were available for questions. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 2 Commissioner Miller commented that Mr. Butcher and Mr. Deitos visited his office to discuss the project and asked that they comment on the screening of the mechanical equipment. Roger Deitos, Principal of GAA Architects, gave an overview on how the mechanical equipment would be screened. Commissioner Dyer indicated that the triangular planters that were to be located east of building ten were not shown on the plot plan and hoped that would be corrected. Mr. Deitos stated that there would not be a problem in adding the planters at that location. Commissioner Miller asked the applicant if the pilasters between the windows would be thicker than the cross elements of the tilt-up construction. Mr. Deitos stated that the pilasters would be thicker. Mr. Baeza referred to the landscaping on-site and asked if credit could be given for the thirty-six (36") inch box Date Palm trees since they provided a larger canopy. He also indicated that staff was satisfied with the proposed landscape plan and would like to modify the condition of approval to approve the plan at this meeting instead of bringing it back as an addenda item at a later time. Commissioner Miller asked the height of the proposed Date Palm trees. Mr. Baeza indicated that the Date Palm trees would be twenty (20)feet high. Chairman Macdonald confirmed that it was the consensus of the Commission to modify the condition of approval to approve the landscape plan at this time. Commissioner Dyer had concerns about the hydro-seed swale and wanted assurance that it would be maintained. Mr. Baeza gave an overview relative to the maintenance of the landscaping on-site. Commissioner Dyer commented that she still had concerns using a native mix on such a visible corner and Commissioner Cook asked if there was anything available that could ensure a neat appearance. Director Shaw commented that this may be the wrong type of treatment since there is concern about the potential appearance. He suggested a few alternatives and recommended bringing the landscape plan back to the Commission with some other ways of treating the swales. Mr. Baeza indicated that the hydro-seed could be replaced with shrubs like the ones being used on the inner stall planters. Commissioner Dyer commented that she prefers plants over concrete but would like to see something from the landscape architect confirming that the plantings would be successful. Commissioner Foster shared Commissioner Dyer's concerns relative to the plantings and would like to see the plans come back with some alternative proposals. Commissioner Shamp stated that he would like to see some photographs of well established, similar plant installations. He indicated that native grasses would be his preference since it is less water intensive than turf and that river rock is a potential attractive nuisance for vandalism. Commissioner Miller indicated that this was a well designed project and virtually everything that the applicant has been asked to do has been done. He would like to accommodate everyone's concerns by allowing staff to make the decision relative to the landscaping plan and approve the project today. Commissioner's James, Cook, Dyer and Foster concurred with Commissioner Miller's suggestion to let staff review and approve the landscaping plan. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 3 Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Commission Review and Approval 835, and Minor Subdivision No. 303 and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination" in accordance with City guidelines. It is recommended that 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 James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Commission Review and Approval No. 835, and Minor Subdivision No. 303. It is determined by the Commission 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 James, and carried on a 7-0 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. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Subdivision No. 303 subject to conditions of approval, and based on the following findings: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code and East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; the project has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial and is consistent with the General Plan, the development standards of the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and; 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The site is large enough to subdivide into a thirteen (13) building commercial center; 3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a commercial center. The General Plan Land Use Designation of Commercial and zoning of EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan both allow for commercial subdivisions; 4. 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; 5. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems; The initial study prepared for the project includes mitigation measures, Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 4 which are imposed as Conditions of Approval, addressing the project's potential to create health problems; 6. The design of the subdivision and 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; free access will be provided throughout the site; 7. That pursuant to California Government Code Section 66474.4, of the Subdivision Map Act the land is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The property is not under Williamson Act Contract. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No. 835, subject to the following findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval: 1. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use; the project complies of the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; 2. That the site properly relates to adjoining streets which are designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed development; 3. That the conditions of approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 835 are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; the project 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; 4. That the use is desirable for the overall development of the community; the project will provide new retail space and offices for business located in the City; 5. The proposed project will be consistent with the existing Commercial Designation of the General Plan. This includes the modification to Commission Review and Approval conditions number eighteen (18) h., (18)q., and the first line of nineteen (19) and the addition of nineteen (19) h., as follows: 18. (h). Based on the submitted landscape plan the applicant shall provide twenty-five (25) additional 15-gallon trees in the parking area with placement determined by staff. The additional 15-gallon trees shall come from the list of City recommended parking area shade trees. Seventy seven (77) of the proposed 74" bGx trees adjaGent to parking stalls shall he inrreosed_ in size to 36" box trees. The project shall provide 225 15-gallon trees, 112 24" box trees, and 113 36" box trees. All trees shall meet the following minimum caliper sizes. If the caliper size cannot be met at the container size, then the developer shall increase the container size to meet the required caliper. 18 (q). Final landscape plans, irrigation system plans, tree preservation techniques and preservation guarantees shall be reviewed and approved by the Plan ,iRg r A-M. „i1616ier, staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. Plans shall be in conformance with the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 1990. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 5 19. The landscape plans for the parking area and the remainder of the site shall be approved by the Planning Gommiocion staff prior to the issuance of Building Permits and shall include the following: 19. (h) The project shall add one additional tree well at the northeast corner of the site. The modifications to eighteen (18) (h) and (q) and nineteen (19) and addition of nineteen (19) (h) was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote. B. ADRIAN GADS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) 1. Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 3. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on General Plan Amendment No. 113 amending the General Plan Land Use Designation from Low Density Residential (0 to 6 units per acre) to Medium Density Residential (0 to 15 units per acre) on 3.63 acres located on the east side of Webster Street north of Lugonia Avenue in the R-1, Single Family Residential District(proposed R-2, Multiple Family Residential District). 4. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on Zone Change No. 426 to change the zoning designation from R-1, Single Family Residential District to R-2, Multiple Family Residential District on 3.63 acres located on the east side of Webster Street north of Lugonia Avenue. 5. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider a recommendation to the City Council on Conditional Use Permit No. 889 to develop a seventy- one (71) unit senior housing complex on approximately 3.63 acres located on the east side of Webster Street north of Lugonia Avenue in the R-1, Single Family Residential District(proposed R-2, Multiple Family Residential District). Commissioner Miller recused himself at 2:45 p.m. on item numbers III. (b), Adrian Gaus, and IV. (a), Pence Construction, due to a conflict of interest. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Manuel Baeza gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. The project was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 9t" to allow staff to review the project for consistency with the new regulations for density bonuses. It was determined that the density bonus and additional incentives are consistent with the new State provisions. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Shamp asked for clarification relative to the roofing materials. Mr. Baeza stated that the applicant could clarify what type of roof materials would be used. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant would wish to address the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 6 Ron Rule, representing the Housing Authority, and Herta Gaus, Project Architect, thanked staff for their help on the project and stated that they were available for questions. Commissioner Shamp asked what type of roofing materials would be used. Ms. Gaus stated that asphalt shingles would be used on the buildings. Commissioner Shamp asked if the railings on the second floor were glass railings. Ms. Gaus stated that the preliminary renderings show glass railings but she would prefer to leave this open to use wrought iron railings if the glass railings were found to be too expensive. Commissioner Shamp stated that he preferred the wrought iron versus the glass railings. Mario Saucedo, Chairman of the Redlands Visioning Committee, stated that they were in support of the project and that it would provide affordable senior housing. He commented that a pedestrian crosswalk is needed at Lugonia Avenue and Clay Street and hoped that the Commission would find a way to provide some type of safe crossing on the busy street when the senior housing development was completed. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Miller excused)that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment No. 113, Zone Change No. 426 and Conditional Use Permit No. 889, and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination" in accordance with City guidelines. It is recommended that 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 Foster, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Miller excused)that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for General Plan Amendment No. 113, Zone Change No. 426 and Conditional Use Permit No. 889. It is recommended that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or over burden public services in the community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Miller excused) that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1118, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 113. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Miller excused) that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1119, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 426. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 7 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Miller excused)that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on Conditional Use Permit No. 889, subject to the following findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; 1. The proposed development will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City. The project is a senior housing multiple family development in an area that will be designated for multiple family residential development; 2. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The project is designed with adequate street access and will meet all building codes; 3. The proposed development will comply with the regulations of the City's General Plan, and applicable zoning district and the City's development standards, if the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change associated with the project are approved. 4. The proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location. The project site is an infill lot that can accommodate the multiple family development. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. PENCE CONSTRUCTION, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: JOSHUA ALTOPP) 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. Consideration of Commission Review and Approval No. 670 (Revision 1) to develop an 18,480 square foot addition to the existing Express Containers warehouse for a combined total building area of 44,000 square feet with an 8,100 square foot-covered parking canopy on approximately 2.60 acres, located at 560 Iowa Street in the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing and indicated that Commissioner Miller was still recused due to a conflict of interest. Project Planner Joshua Altopp gave a PowerPoint presentation and an overview of the project. Mr. Altopp addressed the concerns relative to the proposed parking spaces. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner James appreciated staffs efforts in clarifying the parking situation on the proposed project. He stated that the parking is acceptable as proposed. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 8 Director Shaw indicated that there could be fifty-one (51) parking spaces with the modifications that Mr. Altopp proposed which would result in eight spaces for the office, forty (40) spaces for the manufacturing component and three (3)spaces for the automated warehouse. Commissioner Shamp asked if the seven trees shown on the landscaping plan would be retained with the recommended shift of parking spaces on the east side of the lot. Mr. Altopp stated that the seven trees could remain along the rear perimeter. Commissioner Shamp referred to the proposal in removing the existing trees on the west side of the site and asked if other alternatives were looked at in retaining those trees. Mr. Altopp stated that the applicant could address this issue. Chairman Macdonald asked if the applicant was available to address the Commission. Raymond Schofield, Project Architect, and Molly McMillan, representing Pence Construction, addressed the parking issues and turning radiuses. Ms. McMillan indicated that they are not able to meet the parking requirements recommended by staff stating that the drive aisle would not be sufficient for deliveries and that they could not get sixteen (16) parking stalls along the backside of the site. Director Shaw indicated that based on the sketches provided, there is a radius problem with both staff's alternative and with the applicant's proposed site plan. Ms. McMillan stated that staff is taking away the landscaping at the back of the property and would like to expand the two sides with landscaping in order to make two drive aisles. The twenty(20)foot drive aisles would restrict the turning radius. Chairman Macdonald and Director Shaw suggested eliminating or narrowing down the planters just before the back of the building. Ms. McMillan referred to the existing planters and Water Quality Management Plan, stating that it was a huge cost to the owner and pulling out the existing five foot planters and putting in new landscaping would be a big additional expense. Commissioner Dyer stated that it appeared that staff did the redesign due to materials being stored in existing parking stalls. Ms. McMillan indicated that there was storage outside in the parking spaces because they needed a larger building. Commissioner Cook asked why the trees in the front of the site were being removed. Ms. McMillan stated they needed to be removed due to Water Quality Management Plan requirements. Commissioner James asked Ms. McMillan for the number of parking spaces that she was proposing. Ms. McMillan indicated that she was proposing fifty(50) parking spaces. Director Shaw referenced parking space numbers thirty-four (34) through forty-six (46) at the rear of the property, stating that this parking area did not have the required end planters and that there was a problem with the radius in terms of the Fire Department having access. Director Shaw indicated that staff was trying to propose some alternatives that would resolve these issues. Ms. McMillan stated that she showed the site plan to Fire Marshall Leonard Temby, who indicated that the Fire Department would not have a problem with the turning radius. Commissioner James asked the purpose of the covered parking or canopy. Ms. McMillan indicated that the covered parking would protect the cardboard stock from being damaged by the sun or rain during delivery. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 9 Chairman Macdonald asked if the trucks would have room to get around forward and back if they were not required to widen the existing planter. Mr. Schofield indicated that there would be enough room if the planter did not have to be widened but that it would not allow landscaping requirements to be met. Chairman Macdonald indicted that the project needed to go back to staff to work out the details of the parking. He stated that it sounds like the applicant agrees with the fifty (50) spaces but cannot accomplish the turning radius. Ms. McMillan stated that they could accomplish the turning radius with their proposed site plan. Commissioner Dyer stated that the applicant's site plan does not meet the City requirements and that there are too many variables going on. Director Shaw recommended continuing the project for thirty (30) days to work with the applicant to resolve the issues and bring back a site plan that staff and the applicant can agree upon. Chairman Macdonald indicated that the landscaping of the existing building is very bare relative to what is currently required today. Director Shaw concurred with Chairman Macdonald. Commissioner Dyer stated that the plum accent colors appear very faded in addition to the wrought iron fences on the side of the site. She stated that she would like to see a condition stating that they should be repainted to match the new addition. Commissioner Dyer also indicated that the precision block wall with the barbed wire on top that is adjacent to the site needs some vines to hide it on the northerly side. Commissioner Shamp stated that it would be more preferable to go along with what the applicant is proposing with the parking under cover and a wider landscape buffer along the back of the property. He indicated that if the Commission approves staffs recommended site plan, the landscape area is going to be reduced and it seems that there is adequate parking even if they have to store things outside once in awhile. Commissioner Cook concurred with Commissioner Shamp. Commissioner Dyer stated that this is a very remote rear portion of a site that will eventually be constructed around with minimal impact on the Community relative to the landscaping. She indicated that the applicants design is fine, as long as it is functional and meets the basic requirements for landscaping. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller excused), that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review & Approval No. 670 (Revision 1)to the meeting of March 13, 2007. V. ADDENDA- NONE VI. MINUTES A. JANUARY 23, 2007 It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote to approve the minutes of January 23, 2007. Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 10 VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF FEBRUARY 6, 2007 Mr. Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council Actions of February 6, 2007. VIII. ADJOURN TO FEBRUARY 27, 2007 Chairman Macdonald adjourned the meeting at 3:37 p.m. to February 27, 2007. Christine Szilva Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of February 13, 2007 Page 11