Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 11-13-07_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, November 13, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: Jim Macdonald, Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Carol Dyer, Commissioner Paul Foster, Commissioner John James, Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF Jeffrey Shaw, Director PRESENT: Robert Dalquest, Assistant Director Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney Tamara Alaniz, Associate Planner Christopher Boatman, Junior Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Macdonald called the meeting to order. All Commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioner Miller. II. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Planning Commission review of application for the person to person transfer of an Off-Sale Beer and Wine License for the 7-11 store located at 1161 W. Lugonia Avenue. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote to approve the Consent Calendar. III. OLD BUSINESS A. CITY OF REDLANDS, 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 ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 313 adding Chapter 18.170 to the Redlands Municipal Code establishing development standards for publicly displayed artwork, a public art program, and an inventory of existing public art located on public or private property. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz indicated that a subcommittee meeting of the Planning Commission and the Cultural Arts Commission was held on October 30, 2007 which resulted in several changes to the language of the ordinance. Ms. Alaniz gave an overview of the proposed changes to the language. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1117 and recommend approval to the City Council for Ordinance Text Amendment No. 313. Clark Morrow, Chairman of the Cultural Arts Commission, stated the Cultural Arts Commission was in agreement with the recommended changes to the language of the ordinance. Mr. Morrow had a question relative to the drama and theater arts language being removed from 18.170.080 and asked if there was a legal prohibition against using the money for drama and theater activities. Director Shaw indicated that there were components of the ordinance that included provisions for theater arts and art education but Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 1 through previous revisions, it was decided to delete those provisions and that is what was provided to the Commission. Director Shaw stated that the sub-committee noticed that there was some left over language through the fee component and that they wanted to be consistent in deleting those sections. Mr. Morrow expressed that the Cultural Arts Commission would like to maintain the potential of contributing to the dramatic, theatrical artistic element. Commissioner Cook asked if other cities had that component relative to donating to the drama and theater arts. Mr. Morrow believed that other cities had funds in place in which contributions could be made to local theatrical organizations that came from their ordinances. Coley Bowman, Cultural Arts Commission, expressed his gratitude to the members of the Planning Commission who worked to revise the language of the ordinance. Mr. Bowman asked the Planning Commission for their support and to move the ordinance forward to the City Council for their approval. David Water, 525 S. Wabash Avenue, read a letter to the Planning Commission addressing the fees associated with the ordinance. Mr. Waters indicated that he is opposed to the proposed ordinance. Dora Waters, 525 S. Wabash Avenue, read a letter to the Planning Commission addressing the excessive fees associated with the ordinance. Ms. Waters stated that she is opposed to the proposed ordinance. Mike Layne, 31 N. Michigan Street, thanked the Planning Commission for their participation on this project and indicated that the ordinance would be good for the local economy. Commissioner Shamp asked that the City Council consider an exception for low income housing and that he supported the language proposed in the ordinance. Commissioner James indicated that the sub-committee meeting was constructive and that the proposed ordinance is favorable. Commissioner James indicated that he would support the ordinance. Commissioner Foster indicated that he did not support the ordinance but was not opposed to moving it forward to the City Council. Commissioner Foster recommended that the ordinance be reviewed by both the BEDAC (Business and Economic Development Advisory Committee) and Blue Ribbon Committee for their input prior to the City Council taking action. Chairman Macdonald indicated that there was a question relative to the application of the analysis to determine the amount of monies involved. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the question to be resolved is the discussion that lent to the increase included this discrepancy in how the building valuation is determined. Ms. Alaniz stated that staff is recommending that the Commission resolve that language or what that language means and determine whether to keep it at 1/2% or increase it to the one percent (1%) as proposed with the ordinance. Commissioner's Cook, James, and Shamp indicated that they supported the ordinance as written. Chairman Macdonald stated that the second issue to be resolved was Mr. Morrow's request to establish a mechanism to fund an arts component. Commissioner Dyer indicated that she would like to keep the ordinance as written and keep the arts component as a separate issue. Commissioner Cook concurred with Commissioner Dyer. Mr. Waters asked how much money would be generated using the new figures at one percent (1%). Ms. Alaniz indicated that the determination would be made using the latest figures. Marcy Ruffalo, 13034 South Lane, asked if she would have to pay the fee if she purchased a house. Chairman Macdonald indicated that the ordinance pertained to the development of building a house, business or something with a value in excess of$300,000. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 2 Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 4-2 vote, (Chairman Macdonald and Commissioner Foster opposed), that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the Negative Declaration for Ordinance Text Amendment No. 313. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 4-2 vote, (Chairman Macdonald and Commissioner Foster opposed), that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1117, recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance Text Amendment No. 313. B. REDLANDS CENTER LLC, 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. 838 to develop a commercial retail center consisting of an in-line set of retail businesses and one free standing restaurant with a combined floor area of 51,101 square feet on approximately 4.79 acres, located south of Interstate 10 Freeway on the west side of California Street 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. 893 to establish a drive-thru food establishment within a proposed retail center located south of Interstate 10 Freeway on the west side of California Street in the EV/CG, General Commercial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Assistant Director Robert Dalquest indicated that the applicant was asked to make changes in the elevations of the project but was not ready for this hearing. Staff recommended continuance to the November 27, 2007 meeting. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote the Planning Commission continue the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Hearing on Commission Review and Approval No. 838 and the Public Hearing for the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and Conditional Use Permit No. 893 to November 27, 2007. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. FORD STREET PARTNERS LLC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 3 1. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 319 a request to allow a tentative parcel map to create a single parcel for the development of an approved two-story office building with a floor area of 19,750 square feet on approximately 2.99 acres, located at the northeast corner of Ford Street and Reservoir Road in the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Chris Boatman gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of Minor Subdivision No. 319 subject to the conditions of approval. Doug Goodman, Civil Engineer representing the applicant, indicated that he was available to answer questions. Mr. Haggag had questions relative to traffic flow, noise, and property values. Director Shaw indicated that a traffic analysis was done for the project but that a noise study was not required. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission find that Minor Subdivision No. 319 is considered a Class 5 Categorical Exception under the provisions of Section 15305(c) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Minor Subdivision No. 319 subject to conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code; 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development; The site meets the minimum development standards for the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District; 3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a 19,750 square foot office building; the General Plan Land Use Designation of Office and zoning of the A-P, Administrative and Professional Office District 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; Environmental Impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted for the related Commission Review and Approval No. 839; 6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 4 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 in an agricultural preserve. B. GLEN AND SUZANNE CHAPPELL, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) 1. PUBLIC HEARING for the Planning Commission to consider VARIANCE NO. 749, a request to grant a variance from Section 18.33.100 to allow an eleven foot ten inch (11', 10") reduction in the required twenty-five foot (25) front yard setback for an existing structure located at 13020 South Lane in the R-A-A, Residential Estate Animals District. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Chris Boatman gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed variance. Staff indicated that all four findings could not be made and recommended denial of the variance. Glen Chappell, 13020 South Lane, passed out pictures of the garage and surrounding properties to the Commission for their review. Mr. Chappell gave an overview of the project indicating that the total expenses for the garage/shop total $62,673. Mr. Chappell stated that seventy-five percent (75%) of the project has been completed and indicated that it would be cost prohibitive to tear down the existing structure and rebuild. He asked for the Planning Commission's consideration to complete the remodel as originally submitted and approved by the City. Jeff Sceranka, 31011 Bedford Drive, indicated his concerns that the project was nearly complete and that a lot of money had been spent by Mr. Chappell. Mr. Sceranka commented on the setback issues relative to the garage/shop and stated that the new structure is an improvement to the neighborhood. Edith Schmidt, 13082 South Lane, stated that the project should be approved and that the new structure will be an asset to the neighborhood. Lee Young, 13050 South Lane, indicated that he is in favor of approving the variance and concurred with Ms. Schmidt's comments. Marcy Ruffalo, 13034 South Lane, indicated that she was in favor of approving the variance. Chairman Macdonald indicated that a letter of opposition in approving the variance was received from Mr. Glenn Huibregtse, 31155 Danelaw Avenue. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Mr. Boatman advised the Commission of several typographical errors in the staff report relative to the variance number and indicated that the lot coverage ratio was 24% which includes the addition. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Ms. Ruffalo asked to see the letter Mr. Huibregtse submitted to the Commission. Chairman Macdonald gave Ms. Ruffalo a copy of the letter for her review. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 5 Commissioner Dyer commented that the first finding of the variance could have been shown as an exceptional circumstance since the orientation of the building is really a side yard setback by code and due to the topography. Commissioner Dyer stated that she would support the variance based on the comments from the neighbors that the structure is an enhancement and not a detriment to the neighborhood. Commissioner James concurred with Commissioner Dyer's comments and indicated that the testimony from the neighbors was compelling. Commissioner James indicated that he would support the variance. Commissioner Cook indicated that the applicant went through the whole process in good faith with the City, that a mistake was made, and that the City should have caught it. Commissioner Foster concurred with Commissioner Cook since the applicant did everything correctly and above board. Commissioner Foster supported the variance. Commissioner Shamp concurred with the rest of the Commission in coming up with four positive findings and moving forward with the variance. Chairman Macdonald indicated that the four findings of the variance needed to be looked at in order to satisfy code requirements and that finding number one could be made since there are exceptional circumstances. Director Shaw indicated that finding number one could be made positive due to the orientation of the residence in terms of being directed more to the side yard as opposed to the front yard. The second finding could be made by identifying the variance granted for a front yard setback and that would be a valid basis to support the variance. The fourth finding could be turned around by making it a positive finding with respect to the General Plan and that it is consistent with the neighborhood and is a positive addition. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission determine that Variance No. 749 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, under a Class 5(a) Categorical Exemption of Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission deny approve Variance No. 749 subject to the following findings: 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 as the proposed addition replaces a non-conforming structure which encroaches into a required front yard setback, the orientation of the front is to the east making the garage a side yard, the average setback will vary from 134" to 23' and a portion of the paved area will be replaced with landscaping, enhancing the visual appearance of the site. 2. 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; as the property at 31258 Endymion has a nine (9) foot reduction in the front yard setback. 3. The granting of such variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property of others in the vicinity which is supported by the comments of neighbors in the area. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 6 4. That the granting of the variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Redlands as the addition is consistent with the neighborhood. C. CITY OF REDLANDS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: ROBERT DALQUEST) 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 ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 316 to add Section 18.164.325 to the Redlands Municipal Code regarding adjustments to off-street parking requirements for mixed-use projects in the Downtown Specific Plan No. 45 and in the C-3, General Commercial District and C-4, Highway Commercial District. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Assistant Director Bob Dalquest gave a presentation of the proposed ordinance. Mr. Dalquest passed out a letter to the Commission from Steven Ross from the Krikorian Theatres requesting that the ordinance provide some flexibility to permit project proponents of mixed use development. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1149 and the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the adoption of Ordinance Text Amendment No. 316. Steve Ross, Vice President for new development for the Krikorian Theaters, indicated that they are in favor of the concept of shared parking. Mr. Ross indicated that they would like to add text to the proposed ordinance to incorporate a customized study that would result in a more efficient and adequate shared parking plan. Commissioner Foster asked Director Shaw if staff had a position on Mr. Ross' request at this time or if this item should be continued to give staff the opportunity to review the request. Director Shaw indicated that staff has met with Mr. Ross for some time on this issue but that staff has decided to move forward with the proposed shared parking ordinance based on the ULI standards. Joe Donati, representing Investwest Group, indicated that he is excited about the proposed ordinance and that it is a great step in downtown redevelopment. Mr. Donati stated that it is a comprehensive and workable plan that is similar to others currently utilized by other cities. Commissioner Shamp indicated that there may be a compromise solution where only projects that exceed a certain size are eligible to pursue the alternative compliance approach. Commissioner Shamp commented that some flexibility to shrink parking counts to accommodate for increased bicycle transportation and public transit would be a good thing to have built into the ordinance and could be based on historical data from previous projects. Commissioner Dyer indicated that this was a well thought out ordinance guided by the ULI program with a simple and effective matter manner to affect the shared parking. Chairman Macdonald asked if there were any avenues within the proposed ordinance for flexibility or adjustment. Assistant Director Dalquest indicated that there is currently no flexibility in the ordinance. Chairman Macdonald asked if there could be a variance request or anything along that line. Director Shaw commented that they would rather not support variances but would rather have something written into the ordinance to provide for some flexibility or that there may be alternative ways to provide that flexibility. Director Shaw indicated that one alternative would be to look towards the Specific Plan area as a way in which to differentiate this ordinance from other areas. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 7 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Negative Declaration for Ordinance Text Amendment No. 316. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1149, recommending that the City Council adopt Ordinance Text Amendment No. 316. V. ADDENDA A. A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Redlands relating to the establishment of time limitations for comments from members of the public. Director Jeff Shaw gave a brief overview of the proposed resolution. Director Shaw indicated that the resolution before the Commission was based upon staff's synopsis of the Planning Commission's discussion that took place on October 9, 2007. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote to adopt Resolution No. 1148, a resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Redlands relating to the establishment of time limitations for comments from members of the public. VI. MINUTES A. October 23, 2007 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner Cook, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Foster abstained), to approve the minutes of October 23, 2007. VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF NOVEMBER 6, 2007 Director Shaw gave a brief presentation on the City Council Actions of November 6, 2007 Commissioner Dyer asked for a status on the Sheryl Bruszka project that was being appealed to the City Council. Director Shaw indicated that Ms. Bruszka did file an appeal and will be heard at the November 20, 2007 City Council Meeting. Commissioner Foster asked when the Art in Public Places would go before City Council. Director Shaw indicated that there was still some administrative review along with the request for the ordinance to be reviewed by BEDAC and the Blue Ribbon Committee. Director Shaw indicated that it would probably go before the City Council sometime at the beginning of 2008. Commissioner Dyer asked about the Cypress Villas project relative to the palm trees and asked if it was going before the Street Tree Committee. Assistant Director Dalquest indicated that the arborists report has been completed and is waiting for the review by the Street Tree Committee. Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 8 Commissioner Dyer asked about updates relative to the review of the landscaping ordinance amendments and the architectural guidelines. Director Shaw indicated that the landscaping would come before the Commission at the November 23, 2007 meeting at 1:00 p.m., and the review of the architectural guidelines would take place on December 11, 2007. VIII. ADJOURN TO NOVEMBER 27, 2007 Chairman Macdonald adjourned the meeting at 4:32 p.m. to November 27, 2007. Christine Szilva Jeffrey L. Shaw, Director Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes of November 13, 2007 Page 10 Planning Commission Minutes of October 23, 2007 Page 11