Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 5-27-08_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, May 27, 2008, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: Jim Macdonald, Chairman Paul Foster, Vice Chairman Ruth Cook, Commissioner Carol Dyer, Commissioner Gary Miller, Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner John James, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF Oscar Orci, Director PRESENT: Robert Dalquest, Assistant Director Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney Tamara Alaniz, Associate Planner Tabitha Kevari, Assistant Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Vice Chairman Foster called the meeting to order. All Commissioners were present with the exception of Chairman Macdonald. II. CONSENT ITEMS- NONE III. OLD BUSINESS A. OLYMPIC BARRINGTON,APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) 1. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on AMENDMENT NO. 4 to SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 23, amending the specific plan to establish the sign standards of the C-3 and C-4 Districts in a uniform sign program located on the southeast corner of Ford Street and Redlands Boulevard in the Administrative and Professional Office District of Specific Plan No. 23. 2. Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on COMMISSION SIGN REVIEW NO. 329 to construct two (2) forty (40) square foot monument signs for an approved commercial center located on the southeast corner of Ford Street and Redlands Boulevard in the Administrative and Professional Office District of Specific Plan No. 23. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz gave an overview of the proposed project. Ms. Alaniz recommended that the Planning Commission add a condition requiring the non-illumination of the Patricia Drive monument sign. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of Specific Plan No. 23, Amendment No. 4 and the continuation of Commission Sign Review No. 329 to the July 8, 2008 meeting. Pat Meyer, representing Olympic Barrington, concurred with staff's recommendations and the added condition relative to the non-illumination of the Patricia Drive monument sign. Commissioner Miller indicated that it should be clarified in the sign program guideline that no sign shall exceed 80% of the linear foot (not square footage) on any elevation. Ms. Alaniz indicated that she would request that the applicant revise the specification. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 1 Commissioner Miller commented on the wording under the Typeface and Colors and suggested that it be revised to read that "uniformity and font style, size and color is encouraged, however, allowances will be made for national identity and that signage shall be placed in a manner to be sensitive to the architecture." Robert Mollenauer, 392 Los Robles Crest, had concerns about the location of the illuminated sign across the street from his home. Vice Chairman Foster was unsure if the sign in question would be illuminated all night and asked if there was a limitation on the time it would be lit. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the Commission had the discretion to set time limitations on the illumination of the sign. Mr. Meyer indicated that the monument sign is perpendicular to Ford Street and that Mr. Mollenauer home would overlook the end cap of the sign. Mr. Meyer did not have a problem with curtailing the illumination of the sign at a respectable hour. Vern Ziska, 381 Los Robles Crest, had the same concerns as Mr. Mollenauer relative to the illumination of the sign and asked if the complex would be lit all night. Ms. Alaniz indicated that some of the signs, if not all of the signs on the walls would be illuminated. Mr. Ziska asked if any of the illuminated signs would be facing Ford Street. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the signs would be facing inside the complex. Vice Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. Commissioner Miller indicated that there would be some illuminated signs facing Ford Street. Ms. Alaniz indicated that staff did work with the applicant relative to signs facing Ford Street and precluded those from having wall signage on them. Commissioner Miller indicated that that plans show that the west elevation of retail building one (1) has three signs facing Ford Street. Ms. Alaniz concurred that the plans shows three signs facing Ford Street. Vice Chairman Foster opened the public hearing. Mr. Meyer stated that they will prepare an exhibit showing the overall relationship of the signs to the surrounding properties and would present it at the July 8t" meeting. Vice Chairman Foster asked if there would be signage facing the homes on Ford Street. Mr. Meyer indicated that retail buildings facing Ford Street would have signage. Vice Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and moved on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council determine that Amendment No. 4 to Specific Plan No. 23 is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, under a Class 5 Categorical Exemption of Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. Commissioner Miller commented that he spoke to Ms. Alaniz about putting a commercial signage standard in an Administrative Professional zone but that it had been explained that this was consistent with most of the signage in similar areas which is why he was comfortable seconding the motion. This includes the added condition of approval requiring that the Patricia Street monument sign not be illuminated. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 2 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council determine that Commission Sign Review No. 329 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, under a Class 11(a) Categorical Exemption of Accessory Structures. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1160 recommending that the City Council approve Amendment No. 4 to Specific Plan No. 23. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue Commission Sign Review No. 329 to the meeting of July 8, 2008. B. RASPBERRY INVESTMENTS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) 1. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider Conditional Use Permit No. 821 Revision No. 1 to expand the existing bakery business by 586 square feet, existing lodge facility by 1,426 square feet and to construct a 672 square foot covered patio structure used for the ceremony area at the Tennessee Gardens Center located at 615 & 619 Tennessee Street in the C-M, Commercial Industrial District. Project Planner Tabitha Kevari indicated that the applicant requested a continuance to the June 10, 2008 meeting in order to prepare additional information for the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Shamp, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Public Hearing on the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study and Conditional Use Permit No. 821 Revision 1 to the meeting of June 10, 2008. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. ORANGE TREE ASSOCIATES, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) 1. Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 3. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on AMENDMENT NO. 12 to SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 25 to amend Section 3(A)(4)(c) to allow the maximum height of buildings adjacent to Interstate 10 to be three (3) stories in height instead of 2'/2 stories, or thirty-five feet (35'), in height located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane, north of Interstate 10 Freeway, west of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 3 4. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on VARIANCE NO. 752 to allow a reduction of five feet in the required fifteen foot (15')freeway setback for the development of a 51,432 square foot banking facility and approximately fifty (50) square foot drive-through automated teller machine on approximately 3.05 acres, located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane, north of Interstate 10 Freeway, west of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. 5. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 927 to establish an approximately fifty (50) square foot drive-through automated teller machine within a proposed banking facility located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane, north of Interstate 10 Freeway, west of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. 6. Consideration of COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 856 to develop a three-story, 51,432 square foot banking facility on approximately 3.05 acres, located on the south side of Orange Tree Lane, north of Interstate 10 Freeway, west of Nevada Street in the Urban Services Commercial District of Specific Plan No. 25. Commissioner Miller recused himself from the meeting at 2:30 p.m. due to a conflict of interest. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz passed out Municipal Utilities and Engineering conditions of approval to the Commissioners. Ms. Alaniz gave an overview of the proposed project and passed around a color material board to the Commission for their review. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 25 Amendment No. 12, Variance No. 752 and Conditional Use Permit No. 927 and recommend that Commission Review and Approval No. 856 be continued to the July 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Vice Chairman Foster opened the public hearing. Glen Follett, GMID Architects, indicated that he was available for questions. Commissioner Dyer commented that the building is symmetrical but that the sidewalk is off center and asked if it could be shifted over so it compliments the building. Mr. Follett indicated that they may be able to accommodate those adjustments. Commissioner Dyer stated that some of the triangular planters adjacent to the sidewalks appear to be missing and would like to see them added so that it is consistent throughout both sides of the building. Mr. Follett indicated that he would confer with the landscape architect. Commissioner Dyer commented that there was only ground cover in all the planters between the rows of parking and would like to see shrubs added within the parking lot and inter-rows of planters. Commissioner Dyer commented that the bottle trees along the freeway are set below grade and would like to see them upsized from 15 gallon to 24 inch box. Mr. Follett commented on the fair share cost of the signal shown on the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Departments (MUED) conditions of approval and asked how they arrived at that amount. Mr. Dalquest indicated that he would contact the MUED Director to see if she was available to address Mr. Follett's questions. Mr. Follett commented that he found the Quality of Life conditions of approval 1 c. unusual for a commercial development since it required the tenant or on-site manager to place collection cans at curbside for collection. Ms. Alaniz concurred with Mr. Follett's concern and recommended flagging the Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 4 item to ensure that the right condition is applied to the Commission Review and Approval which would return to the Planning Commission on July 8, 2008. Mr. Follett commented on the six-car stacking at the kiosk which is the same requirement that the ordinance lists for a drive-through restaurant facility and feels that it was overkill for a banking operation. Ms. Alaniz referred to the Redlands Municipal Code which identifies that there shall be six (6) stacking spaces for drive-through bank operations. Mr. Follett asked if there was a difference between a drive- through operation and a remote kiosk and if that would be a consideration in reducing the number of stacking spaces. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the Planning Commission could take that into consideration and could modify the condition as directed. Assistant Director Bob Dalquest indicated that the MUED Director was not available to address the Commission but that staff could work out the condition with Municipal Utilities relative to the fair share signal cost prior to the project going forward to the City Council. Vice Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. Commissioner James commented that a kiosk is basically a drive-through and cannot make the distinction between the two situations. Vice Chairman Foster concurred with Commissioner James. Commissioner Shamp indicated that he would not be inclined to grant a variance unless there was substantial back-up that the six car stacking in not necessary. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Amendment No. 12 to Specific Plan No. 25, Variance No. 752, Conditional Use Permit No. 927 and Commission Review and Approval No. 856. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Amendment No. 12 to Specific Plan No. 25, Variance No. 752, Conditional Use Permit No. 927 and Commission Review and Approval No. 856, 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. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 1163, recommending to the City Council approval of Amendment No. 12 to Specific Plan No. 25. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 1164, recommending to the City Council approval of Variance No. 752. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 1163, recommending to the City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 927. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 5 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer, and carried on a 5-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 856 to the July 8, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Miller returned to the meeting at 2:56 p.m. Vice Chairman Foster recessed the meeting at 2:56 p.m. Commissioner Shamp left the meeting at 3:00 p.m. Chairman Macdonald arrived at 3:01 p.m. and reconvened the meeting. B. EBBE VIDERIKSEN, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) 1. Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on a Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study 3. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on AMENDMENT NO. 4 to SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 43 to develop a subdivision of approximately forty-four (44) acres into twenty-seven (27) single family residential lots and five (5) lettered, open space lots located on the east side of Alessandro Road in Neighborhood 2 of Specific Plan No. 43. 4. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 18560 to subdivide approximately forty-four (44) acres into twenty-seven (27) single family residential lots and five (5) lettered, open space lots located on the east side of Alessandro Road in Neighborhood 2 of Specific Plan No. 43. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz passed out the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Departments conditions of approval to the Commission for their review. Ms. Alaniz gave an overview of the proposed project. Due to the lateness of the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department's conditions of approval, Ms. Alaniz indicated that the applicant expressed concerns relative to the conditions of the approval since he only had a brief opportunity to review them. Staff recommended continuance of the project in accordance with the applicant's request so that he can address issues relative to the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Departments conditions of approval. Chairman Macdonald asked Ms. Alaniz to expand on what was going to be done on Alessandro Road. Ms. Alaniz indicated that it would be standard curb and gutter on Alessandro with an equestrian trail, a water course, a class one bike lane and a walking path in addition to the 32 foot half width requirement. Ebbe Videriksen, applicant, indicated that he received ten pages of conditions of approval from the Municipal Utilities Department that were e-mailed to him minutes before leaving to come to this meeting and had little time to review them. Mr. Videriksen stated that they may need to continue the meeting now and determine what conditions can be negotiated over the next week. Chairman Macdonald stated that it would be best to continue and discuss all aspects of the project. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 6 Mr. Viderisksen indicated that he was available to answer questions. Commissioner James asked about the rolled asphalt curbs and gutters and indicated that he would like to see some other material used due to the lack of durability of the asphalt. Mr. Viderisksen stated that a concrete curb could be considered without the gutter. Sheril Leonard, representing the Redlands Conservancy, thanked City staff and the developer in what appears to be a very conscientious treatment of the trail system in the area. Ms. Leonard asked for a minor condition to be added to score the concrete driveways where the equestrian path crosses it to give more traction for the horse's hooves. Ms. Leonard stated that she did not see the need for an equestrian trail along Alessandro, at least not from the entrance north, since there is no where for equestrians to go. Ms. Leonard asked if there would be a trail easement. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Mr. Viderisksen stated that it would be a tremendous benefit that the equestrian trail along Alessandro Road could be eliminated from the point of the entrance to Deer Trail Drive to the north. Mr. Viderisksen indicated that he had no objection in creating an easement for the equestrian entrances off Deer Trail Drive and other areas and scoring the concrete drives. Commissioner Miller asked Mr. Viderisksen if he planned to make the subdivision a "for sale" subdivision or did he plan to build speculative homes. Mr. Viderisksen stated that he did not know at this time but that it would probably be speculative homes due to the current housing economy. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Chairman Macdonald asked if scoring the drive would be made a condition of approval. Ms. Alaniz indicated that it would be added as a condition. Commissioner Miller commented that if there is still opportunity in the future for residential lots to be placed along Alessandro Road then there may be a need for the equestrian trail to serve the future development to the north. Ms. Alaniz indicated that there was a tract approved to the north but did not know if they included the equestrian trail along Alessandro Road but could take the opportunity to see if that was incorporated into their plan and report back to the Commission. Chairman Macdonald commented on the easement for the trails and asked if that was something that could be handled by staff. Ms. Alaniz stated that staff could add a condition that states that an easement be established and recorded over the trail area prior to the recordation of the final map. Commissioner Miller stated that he supports the concept of the subdivision but had a number of concerns with the design. Commissioner Miller referred to the termination of Deer Trail Drive that terminates up against a property described as the Ferranto Family Trust and asked if there could be a cul-de-sac or if that street could be extended. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the applicant could be asked if there is a specific purpose why the street is not connecting. Commissioner Miller stated that it was unclear where the street ends and the debris basin starts and asked that the applicant provide more details. Commissioner Miller commented on the considerable manufactured slope on lots 18 and 19 and that lot 20 looks directly into an embankment and would like to see more attention given there with a minimum of a more free form grading than a straight manufactured embankment. Commissioner Miller stated that there was an eighty (80) foot right-a-way for Deer Trail Drive but he measured 60 feet and would like the applicant to clarify the difference. He indicated that the open Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 7 drainage gutter needs more detail and needs to be illustrated and is not keen on the acceleration or deceleration lane since it seems to be overkill given what is already in the area. Commissioner Miller was concerned about the depth of the properties that face Alessandro Road. He commented on the block wall for noise stating that is looked out of character and would like to look at alternatives if there was a way to avoid having the wall. Commissioner Miller supported Commissioner James concerns relative to the asphalt curbs and stated that the setbacks should be more generous with respects to the lots on Alessandro Road. Commissioner Miller stated that the detention basin at the front of the property along Alessandro Road should get some landscaping details. Commissioner Miller indicated that there appears to be something inconsistent relative to the water course which is encroaching into the parkway that needs to be addressed. He commented on the height of the keystone wall at the entrance indicating that it could be enhanced a great deal. Chairman Macdonald asked if the block wall was a sound wall as required by code. Ms. Alaniz indicated that the acoustical analysis on the property indicated that it would be necessary to provide a wall within the minimum decibel levels in the residential area. Commissioner Dyer stated that the grading situation is reasonable, impressive and explained well. Commissioner Dyer commented that she found a number Eucalyptus trees on Alessandro Road to the north of the proposed entrance drive near Deer Trail Drive and indicated that the Eucalyptus trees are significant. She stated that the trees need to be indicated on the grading plan as opposed to the landscape plan later on so that we know what they are and if they are retainable within that corridor. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Mr. Videriksen responded to Commissioner Miller's comments regarding the eighty (80) foot right-a-way, grading, the sound walls and the concrete curb. Mr. Videriksen stated that he would prefer that the concrete curb be limited to a two (2) foot deep curb without the gutter. Mr. Videriksen commented on the landscaping and stated that he was unsure if they could save the Eucalyptus trees but that the first step would be to have them surveyed and located to see to what extent they could save them. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote to continue Specific Plan No. 43, Amendment No. 4 and Tentative Tract Map No. 18560 to the meeting of June 24, 2008 meeting. C. TRUMAN JOHNSON, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) 1. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider MINOR SUBDIVISION NO. 324 to subdivide 7.2 acres into two parcels consisting of a 40,876 square foot lot containing the existing Panera Bread Restaurant and a 6.26 acre lot containing the existing Albertson's Market located on the southwest corner of Redlands Boulevard and Cypress Avenue within Specific Plan No. 41, Citrus Village Shopping Center Specific Plan. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 8 Project Planner Tamara Alaniz gave an overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of Minor Subdivision No. 324 subject to the conditions of approval. Michael Lear, representing the applicant, was available for questions. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission determine that Minor Subdivision No. 324 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, under a Class 15 Categorical Exemption of Minor Land Divisions. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study for Minor Subdivision No. 324, 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. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 6-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1166 approving Minor Subdivision No. 324, subject to the conditions of approval, and based upon the findings therein. D. HOUSING PARTNERS I, INC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TAMARA ALANIZ) A recommendation to the City Council for the approval of points for RDA 2008-11- 01 for Conditional Use Permit No. 889, an approved 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-2, Multiple Family Residential District. This request is for 71 allocations, and no allocations have been previously awarded for this project. Commissioner Miller recused himself at 3:59 p.m. due to a conflict of interest. Project Planner Tamara Alaniz reviewed the Residential Development Allocation categories and point allocation for the proposed project. A total of 38 points were recommended to City Council. Commissioner Foster commented that the RDA process was tedious and asked if there was a way of going through the process in a more efficient manner. Ms. Alaniz indicated that staff could do that in the future and that it would be more beneficial to group the categories instead of going through each item. Commissioner Miller returned to the meeting at 4:20 p.m. E. SHIV TALWAR, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) PUBLIC HEARING to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 931 to establish a Subway Sandwich Shop (eating establishment) within a 1,035 square foot tenant space in an office and commercial development within the Administrative and Professional Office District of Specific Plan 23 located at 1325 Ford Street Suite No. 101. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 9 Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Tabitha Kevari gave a brief overview of the proposed project. Staff recommend approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Shiv Talwar, applicant, stated that he was available to address any questions. Commissioner Miller asked how many visitors come to a Subway on a daily basis. Mr. Talwar indicated that there is an average of 139 customers per day. Manjeet Sran, owner of two other local Subway stores, stated that the average customer count is based on his two current locations. Don Eickman, 387 Cynthia Crest, commented that he represents a large number of people opposed to the Subway due to the potential traffic concerns. Mr. Eickman requested that staff determine how many more people would use Ford Street to visit the Subway as opposed to using it as office space before the Commission makes an action. Chairman Macdonald asked if there were any indications that there might be applications submitted for other eating establishments at this location. Mr. Dalquest stated that staff has not heard of any other tenants that would be restaurants. Robert Mollenauer, 392 Los Robles Crest, had concerns with the excessive traffic on Ford Street and questioned why a Subway was being allowed in an Administrative Professional center. Mr. Talwar indicated that the majority of the customers would come from within the complex itself. Vern Ziska, 381 Los Robles Crest, asked what type of guarantee the residents would have that the Commission would not approve more eateries in the future if they approve this Subway shop. Chairman Macdonald indicated that there would not be any guarantee but that each eating establishment would require a Conditional Use Permit and would be looked at on an individual basis by the Commission. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Commissioner James asked how many traffic lanes would end up being on Ford Street. Mr. Dalquest did not know the number of lanes but indicated that it is an arterial street which result in two lanes in each direction. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Mr. Eickman encouraged everyone to drive up and down Ford Street and indicated that there would not be two lanes in each direction. Commissioner Dyer asked about the parking analysis when the complex was approved and asked if parking was considered for these types of uses. Mr. Dalquest indicated that there was excess parking to allow for some restaurants to go into the development. Commissioner Cook indicated that most of the Subway business would come from within the complex and would actually reduce the amount of traffic. Commissioner Foster commented that he has concerns about this area and that there are traffic problems. Commissioner Foster indicated that he would vote against this project because he continues to believe that the area will become a giant mess and that any retail operation will make it a more congested traffic environment. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 10 Commissioner Miller asked if staff knew what the current traffic count was on Ford Street. Mr. Dalquest indicated that he would research the situation. Commissioner Cook asked for more details relative to what the number of lanes would be on Ford Street. Commissioner Miller had concerns about the parking for future uses in the complex and asked staff for feedback relative to this situation. Commissioner Dyer indicated that she is inclined to support the Subway as an ancillary use for these offices but is concerned with the signage when it comes back to the Commission because she does not want the signs oriented towards the community. Commissioner Dyer commented that the parking counts will be the limiting factor relative to how many retail uses like the Subway would occur there. Commissioner Foster indicated that his concerns are the cumulative effect on all of the development surrounding the interchange. Chairman Macdonald indicated that this development is meeting code and the requirements and traffic would not be a factor unless it produced a LOS (Level of Service) at the intersection. Mr. Dalquest indicated that a traffic study was completed that assumed certain uses and applied trips when the development was approved. Mr. Dalquest stated that staff will address this issue when it returns to the Commission. Commissioner Cook commented that the tenants would leave the complex, drive down Ford Street and go elsewhere if a place was not provided for the tenants of the complex to each lunch and that this would increase traffic congestion. Commissioner James concurred with Commissioner Cook that the Subway was an appropriate use. Commissioner Miller indicated that he would like to see if the traffic study accounted for the two food uses that have been added at the LA Fitness center and if that same traffic study accounted for any food uses, not just retail uses, in this complex. Mr. Mollenauer indicated that he is aware of three other Subways in town that are in retail centers and has never seen a Subway in an Administrative Professional center. Mr. Eickman indicated that it is not the Planning Commissions responsibility to provide a place to eat for the tenants of the complex. Mr. Sran indicated that seventy(70%)of Subway business is during the lunch hours. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Foster, and carried on a 5-1 vote, (Chairman Macdonald opposed), to continue the Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit No. 931 to June 10, 2008 meeting. F. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) 1. Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 45 (AMENDMENT NO. 14) - An amendment to modify Section III(C)(2.2) of the Town Center-Historic District by expanding the boundaries of the Parking Exemption for Specified Restaurants area to the BNSF Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 11 Railway to the north, Fifth Street to the east, and Orange Street to the west. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Project Planner Tabitha Kevari gave an overview of the project. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Mark Gordon, Managing Partner of the Mitten Building, had concerns relative to the public parking in the Mitten Building parking lot and asked where the employees and the customers were going to park. Assistant Director Robert Dalquest indicated that the proposal is to expand the parking over to Fifth Street which includes the Mitten Building and the Hall of Justice. Commissioner Foster indicated that he often frequents the area during the evening and is difficult to find parking and during the lunch hour. Commissioner Foster stated that he shares the same concerns relative to the parking as Mr. Gordon. Mr. Gordon commented that he did not come to the meeting to hold up what is being proposed but indicated that the impact will be when Ramano's and future restaurants open in the future and that there will be no places for people to park. Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. Commissioner Foster stated that he did not believe that a solution for parking is actively on the horizon for the downtown area. Director Orci stated that parking is always a consideration for downtown and that staff has several tools to explore such as the Downtown Specific Plan and the rail lines but are looking at the ability to group parking in the area. Commissioner Foster stated that the Metro Link proposal is eight to ten years down the road and would not resolve Mr. Gordon's parking issue. Director Orci indicated that the Redevelopment Agency could help here by creating a parking management plan that would allow the ability to effectively manage our parking assets to be able to redistribute people so they park in all areas, not just the prime spots. Director Orci commented that there was discussion relative to putting in parking meters where the more valuable spaces are located. Chairman Macdonald asked how this would affect Mr. Gordon's property. Mr. Dalquest indicated that people would be parking in the surrounding area during off peak hours. Commissioner Dyer asked is anyone from the Redevelopment Agency was present to address the issue. Mr. Dalquest indicated that there was a representative from the Redevelopment agency present. Chairman Macdonald opened the public hearing. Arthur Morgan, Redevelopment Agency Consultant Project Manager, spoke about the parking negotiations with the owners of the Mitten building and that the negotiations failed. Mr. Morgan indicated that they are working with Krikorian Development relative to how a parking structure could be constructed which is a study that they are working on now. Commissioner Dyer commented that if we are giving new businesses coming into the City an exception to park in these different areas, then there should be an additional requirement for an assessment towards the parking structure. Commissioner Dyer spoke about going forward with a parking management plan even if it means installing parking meters indicating that it may redirect traffic to other areas. Mr. Morgan indicated the Redevelopment Agency and Community Development Department will be working together on a management plan. Planning Commission Minutes of May 27, 2008 Page 12 Chairman Macdonald closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 5-1 vote, (Commissioner Dyer opposed), that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council on the Negative Declaration for Amendment No. 14 to Specific Plan No. 45. Commissioner Miller stated that he supported the project because it seems to include one of the two buildings that suffers with the policy that is now in place and at least that building would benefit from having that policy expanded and that the City should do a better in supporting the Mitten Building by enforcing the parking. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 5-1 vote, (Commissioner Dyer opposed), that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1167 and recommend that the City Council approve Amendment No. 14 to Specific Plan No. 45. V. ADDENDA- NONE VI. MINUTES A. MAY 13, 2008 It was moved by Commissioner Foster, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 6-0 vote to approve the minutes of May 13, 2008. VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF MAY 20, 2008 Director Oscar Orci gave a brief presentation on the City Council Actions of May 20, 2008. VIII. ADJOURN TO JUNE 10, 2008 Chairman Macdonald adjourned the meeting at 5:25 p.m. to June 10, 2008. Christine Szilva Oscar W. Orci, Director Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of May 13, 2008 Page 13 Planning Commission Minutes of April 8, 2008 Page 14