Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Minutes 1-27-09_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, January 27, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: Paul Foster, Chairman Gary Miller, Vice-Chairman Jim Macdonald, Commissioner Ruth Cook, Commissioner John James, Commissioner Carol Dyer, Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF Oscar Orci, Director PRESENT: Robert Dalquest, Assistant Director Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney Manuel Baeza, Principal Planner Sergio Madera, Associate Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Foster called the meeting to order. All Commissioners were present. Chairman Foster presented a plaque to Jim Macdonald acknowledging and appreciating his three years of service as Chairman of the Planning Commission. II. CONSENT ITEMS A. PATRICK FARANAL, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) Consideration of COMMISSION SIGN REVIEW NO. 358 to construct a monument sign that is four (4') feet in height with a sign area of thirty-two (32) square feet 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. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote to approve the Consent Calendar. III. OLD BUSINESS A. ON TEXAS STREET LLC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) Consideration of COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 851 for the development of a ten (10) building commercial center with 105,500 square feet of floor area on approximately 13 acres located on the north side of San Bernardino Avenue, the west side of Texas Street, and east of Tennessee Street in Concept Plan No. 7. Project Planner Manuel Baeza gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed Commission Review and Approval. Mr. Baeza indicated that two additional conditions of approval were distributed to the Planning Commissioners at the start of the meeting and would pertain to Resolution No. 1174. Staff recommended approval of Commission Review and Approval No. 851 subject to the revised conditions of approval. Commissioner Miller referred to condition of approval number twenty-five (25) and indicated that there was a contradiction in the wording relative to the whether the City or the developer would remove the Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 1 Mexican Fan Palms. He recommended that the wording be amended that the Mexican Fan Palms be designated by the City for removal. Amos Isaac, 1315 Sandra Way, voiced his concerns relative to the destruction of the river rock landmarks along San Bernardino Avenue, Tennessee Street and other areas during the construction process. Mr. Isaac indicated that the river rock curbs should be preserved since they are a major part of the City's history. Chairman Foster asked staff if there was an area of cut stone curb affected by this project. Mr. Baeza indicated that he was not aware of any cut stone curbing on the proposed site. Commissioner Cook indicated that there are river rock curbs rather than cut stone along San Bernardino Avenue which are very distinctive. Mr. Isaac indicated that he was fine with the project as long as the river rock curbs and the river rock canal along Tennessee Street were not being destroyed. Mr. Baeza indicated that Tennessee Street was not affected by this project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner James and carried on a 6-1 vote, (Chairman Foster opposed), that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1184 finding that Commission Review and Approval No. 851 does not require further environmental processing, pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner James and carried on a 6-1 vote, (Chairman Foster opposed), that the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 1174 approving Commission Review and Approval No. 851. This includes the addition of conditions of approval numbers twenty-four (24) and twenty-five (25) as amended by the Planning Commission as follows: 24. Landscaped fingers will be added to the landscaping in the commercial area along San Bernardino Avenue, which will eliminate nine parking spaces on a portion of the development. 25. Prior to the installation of any Mexican Fan Palm (Washingtonia robusta) proposed in the Landscape Plan, the developer shall work with the City of Redlands to identify and acquire Mexican Fan Palms owned by the City that would be designated by the City for removal pursuant to the City's efforts to remove such trees located under power lines. For such identified Mexican fan palms located under, interfering, or anticipated to interfere with overhead power lines, the developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall remove the tree and relocate to the Redlands Commons property pursuant to the Landscape Plan. The developer shall provide the City with a replacement minimum 15-gallon tree listed on the city's approved tree list that is suitable to grow under power lines ("Replacement Tree"). Within 12 months of planting of the Replacement Tree, if the tree does not survive, the developer shall replace the Replacement Tree with another 15- gallon tree listed on the City's approved tree list. The City shall not charge the developer any fee to implement the provisions contained within this subsection. B. REDLANDS CHRISTIAN HOME, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: SERGIO MADERA) PUBLIC HEARING to consider TENTATIVE TRACT No. 18699 to subdivide approximately 20.33 acres containing a Senior Congregate Care facility into twenty-one (21) residential lots and one (1) lettered lot located at the northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Wabash Avenue within Specific Plan 54. Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 2 Project Planner Sergio Madera gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Mr. Madera indicated that staff included condition of approval number eleven (11) that required the project to annex into a Community Facilities District but that the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department made the determination that the condition was not required. Mr. Madera indicated that condition of approval number eleven (11) was being removed from the Planning conditions. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval as amended. Commissioner Dyer commented that lots eighteen through twenty-one were peculiar in their configuration and asked what would be constructed on the lots. Mr. Madera indicated that they would be used for additional facilities. Chairman Foster opened the public hearing. Pat Meyer, Urban Environs, indicated that the applicant is doing the subdivision for financing purposes. He addressed Commissioner Dyer's question regarding what would be constructed on the lots and indicated that they would be congregate care, two story buildings. Mr. Meyer referred to MUED, (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department), conditions of approval nine and ten indicating that staff are requiring the applicant to remove and replace existing pedestrian ramps with ramps that provide the truncated dome yellow strip. He indicated that they are alright with putting in the strips but would like to put the product on top of the existing ramps. Mr. Meyer stated that they would prefer to work with staff to come up with the appropriate product to retrofit on top of the four ramps. Tom Fujiwara, Assistant City Engineer, indicated that the City policy is to install truncated domes that are preformed and embedded into wet concrete to ensure that the domes do not pop up. He stated that the truncated domes were not a requirement when the ramp were installed at the current site and therefore, were not put in. The City is asking to have the truncated domes put in and would ideally like to have them saw cut in and then pour new concrete but realize that it would be expensive for the applicant. They have used adhesive type truncated domes which seem to work well if applied correctly. Mr. Fujiwara stated that it was his opinion to go either way as long as the applicant complies with City's requirements to ensure that the domes do not pop up. Mr. Fujiwara indicated that the City would require that the truncated domes be poured in place for the ramps that currently do not exist so that they meet their standards. Commissioner Macdonald asked if the conditions needed to be rewritten so that the applicant is not mandated to remove the existing ramps. Mr. Fujiwara indicated that that would be fine. Commissioner James suggested amending the wording to read "repair or replace" instead of "replace". Mr. Fujiwara suggested adding "install truncated domes in accordance with City's requirements" but wanted to ensure that the ramps that currently do not exist are done correctly when they are installed. Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. Commissioner Miller commented on the revised condition and asked if the wording "to comply with ADA standards" should be added. Chairman Foster indicated that compliance with ADA standards should be added to the condition. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote that Tentative Tract Map 18699 does not require further environmental processing, pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, based on the following findings: A. The proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; there are no new environmental effects beyond those previously identified. B. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken; the project will be undertaken in the same manner as the previously approved project and, Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 3 C. There is no new information of substantial importance with respect to this project's environmental consequences that was not known at the time the previous mitigated negative declaration was adopted; no new information is available that would have an impact on the proposed project's environmental consequences. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract No.18699 subject to the conditions of approval, and based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed map is consistent with the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. The project has a General Plan land use designation of Low-Medium Density Residential and a zoning designation of Specific Plan 54 and is consistent with both the General Plan, Municipal Code and Specific Plan; 2. The site, which is located at the northeast corner of Fifth Avenue and Wabash Avenue is physically suitable for the existing use as a congregate care facility. The site has a relatively flat grade and is large enough to subdivide into twenty one (21) lots and one (1)common area lot; 3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a twenty one (21) lot subdivision. The adopted Specific Plan allows for the lot configuration as proposed and a maximum of 400 residents; 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. This is a residential project for seniors and 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; 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; public streets and pedestrian access will be provided throughout the project 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. This includes amending the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department (MUED) conditions of approval numbers nine (9)and eleven (11)to allow the placement of the domes. Commissioner Shamp asked if Planning condition of approval number eleven (11) was eliminated under the motion. Assistant Director Dalquest indicated that condition of approval number eleven (11) was stricken from the conditions of approval. C. MEDIAFLO USA, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: SERGIO MADERA) 1. Consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 940 to install a wireless telecommunication facility and Ultra High Frequency (UHF) broadcast antenna on an existing one hundred and fifty-four (154) foot tall tower located at 351 Alabama Street in the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 4 Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Project Planner Sergio Madera stated that the project was continued from the December 9, 2009 Planning Commission meeting due to concerns regarding the existence of a hawk's nest at the top of the existing tower. Mr. Madera gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the project. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Macdonald asked why it was necessary to remove the nest from the tower. Mr. Madera indicated that it was due to potential safety issues to the workers working at the site. Commissioner Dyer asked what the applicant's timeline was on installing the facility. Mr. Madera stated that the biologists report indicated that installation was to commence in April but was not sure if it was a realistic timeline. Commissioner Macdonald asked if the project could be conditioned so that no work could proceed until after the nesting season. Director Oscar Orci indicated that it could be a requirement that no work could proceed until after nesting season. Chairman Foster opened the public hearing. Martha Hudak, Channel Law Group representing MediaFLO USA, indicated that their goal was to start construction before the nesting season. Ms. Hudak stated that MediaFLOW will bring out a biologist prior to construction to ensure that the nest is inactive and to observe any hawk activity in the area to protect the workers who will do the installation. She also indicated that they will determine if bird deterrent measures are needed. Ms. Hudak stated that American Tower will only remove the nest from the tower if it is inactive and indicated that Jim Kelly from American Tower Corporation was present to address any questions of the Commission. Chairman Foster commented that it was his understanding that construction would not be allowed between April and August 1" since it would be nesting season but that Ms. Hudak indicated that construction could take place during that time if biologist did not find eggs or fledglings. Ms. Hudak stated that Chairman Foster was correct that construction could take place during that period if no eggs or fledglings were found. Chairman Foster asked if it could be conditioned to state that construction could not take place during the nesting season. Assistant Director Bob Dalquest indicated that it could be made a condition of approval. Commissioner Macdonald asked for an explanation of the bird deterrent measures. Ms. Hudak deferred Commissioner Macdonald's questions to Mr. Kelly. Jim Kelly, American Tower Corporation, gave an overview of the various bird deterrents and indicated that noise, whistles, flags and aluminum strips were used. Mr. Kelly commented that safety is the first concern with American Tower and if there are no eggs or fledglings present, then the nest could be removed. He indicated that quite often the nest is rebuilt after activity has taken place. Mr. Kelly indicated that the bird deterrents are an industry wide safety measure. Ms. Hudak stated that asking MediaFLO to delay construction would be costly to them. Bill Cunningham gave an overview of the Red Tail Hawk in the canyon area. He indicated that he could not see why the nest should be destroyed because the birds are not there unless they are nesting with eggs or their young. Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. Commissioner Macdonald stated that he wanted to see a condition added that states that the work should be completed prior to nesting season or postponed after nesting season. Commissioner James stated that he was in favor of the co-location but concurred with Commissioner Macdonald in not allowing the construction during the nesting season. Commissioner Miller stated that he erred on the side of protecting the hawk but did not want to delay the Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 5 applicant from doing the project. He asked if we could process their plan check construction documents as soon as possible to enable them to start the construction prior to the nesting season. Commissioner Shamp indicated that there were some critical pieces of data missing relative to the hawk's behavior in order for him to make a decision in moving forward with the project. Commissioner Shamp stated that he would have questions for a biologist if one was available today to address them. He indicated that if he was forced to make a decision today, he would want to err on the side of protecting the hawk. Commissioner Dyer concurred with Commissioner Shamp that the bird will rebuilt the nest if it is disturbed but did not want the nest disturbed during the nesting season whether or not that there were eggs or fledglings in the nest. Commissioner Cook stated that it would be a fine compromise if the project could be processed so the applicant could get the installation built before the nesting season. She did not feel that the nest should be disturbed during the nesting season. Chairman Foster reopened the public hearing. Mr. Cunningham commented that a condition of approval should be added stating that deterrent devices would not be allowed to be used since it would prohibit the birds from using the nest. Ms. Hudek commented that the deterrent devices are used during construction to protect the construction workers. Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Conditional Use Permit No. 940 and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination" in accordance with City guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Dyer, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 940 based on 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 as Wireless Service Facilities are permitted in any zone within the City, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit and the proposed facility complies with all of the development requirements outlined in Sections 18.88 and 18.178 of the Municipal Code; and 2. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare as the project will be at an existing telecommunications facility and thus will not create any additional disturbance in the area; the project includes Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval that minimize the project's impact on surrounding land uses and has been designed to integrated with the existing development at the subject site; and 3. The proposed development complies with the regulations of the City's General Plan, the applicable development standards of the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and those of Chapter 18.178, Wireless Service Facilities; and 4. The proposed development is appropriate at the proposed location because the project will be co-located at an existing wireless telecommunications facility in a predominantly industrial area. This includes the addition of conditions of approval numbers seventeen (17), eighteen (18), and nineteen (19)as follows: Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 6 17. Work shall be completed prior to or after the nesting season of the existing Red Tail Hawk which has been established as mid-March to mid-August. 18. The deterrent devices shall only be installed temporarily during construction activities and shall be removed after construction is completed. 19. Preserve the nest unless its preservation conflicts with OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration). D. OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS LLC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: SERGIO MADERA) 1. Consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 937 to install a sixty-five (65)foot high tower for a wireless telecommunication facility within an existing commercial center located at 1550 Orange Street in the C-2, Neighborhood Convenience Center District. Project Planner Sergio Madera indicated that staff is requesting a continuance of the project to the February 10, 2009 meeting to analyze recently submitted revised plans that address the concerns of the Planning Commission that resulted from the December 9, 2008 meeting. In addition, Mr. Madera stated that the applicant recently completed their public outreach to adjacent property owners regarding the project and indicated that staff would include the results in the February 10, 2009 staff report. Chairman Foster opened the public hearing. No comments were forthcoming and Chairman Foster closed the public hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Shamp and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission continue the Hearing on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Public Hearing on Conditional Use Permit No. 937 to the meeting of February 10, 2009. E. HOSSEIN AFSHARI, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: SERGIO MADERA) Consideration of COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 834 (REVISION 1) for a medical office development consisting of three buildings totaling 122,604 square feet on an 8.90-acre site located at the southwest corner of Alabama Street and Park Avenue within the EV/IC, Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Project Planner Sergio Madera indicated that the project was continued from the January 13, 2009 meeting to address concerns raised by the Planning Commission relative to changes made to the project since it was originally approved on October 10, 2006. Mr. Madera gave a PowerPoint presentation and gave an overview of the minor deviations between the previously approved plans and the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Shamp thanked Mr. Madera for going through the comparisons of the originally approved plans and the working drawings approved during the plan check process step by step. He stated that it helped to clarify the issues considerably. Commissioner Miller had concerns with the drainage basins in front of building "A" but indicated that he was comfortable with staff working that out and wanted to establish that it should be a centerpiece to the complex. Commissioner Miller referred to building "C" and asked if the ramp could be reduced to allow for more landscaping between the building and the street. Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 7 Mr. Afshari commented on the ramp and indicated that the southern portion of the property is in the flood zone and that they had to create walls on the south side and parts of the east and west side and indicated that it was better to raise the pad above the flood zone which required adding the ramp. Commissioner Miller commented that he understood why they needed the ramp but that his calculations show that the ramp could be redesigned to be shorter. Commissioner Cook asked if there could be a condition of approval indicating that the ramp issue could be worked out with staff since a long ramp is not desirable. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner James and carried on a 7-0 vote that Commission Review and Approval No. 834 (R1) does not require further environmental processing, pursuant to Section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, based on the following findings: A. The proposed project would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects; there are no new environmental effects beyond those previously identified. B. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken; the project will be undertaken in the same manner as the previously approved project and, C. There is no new information of substantial importance with respect to this project's environmental consequences that was not known at the time the previous mitigated negative declaration was adopted; no new information is available that would have an impact on the proposed project's environmental consequences." MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Cook, 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 Cook, seconded by Commissioner James and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve a reduced LOS at the intersection of California Street and Redlands Boulevard during the peak hours as permitted in General Plan Policy 5.20b. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Cook, seconded by Commissioner James and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Commission Review and Approval No. 834 (R1) subject to the following findings and 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 with setbacks and development standards of the Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan; 2. The site properly relates to Park Avenue and Alabama Street which will be designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic to be generated by the proposed development because both streets will be constructed to city prescribed standards to their ultimate half widths through compliance with project conditions of approval and the applicant has been conditioned to construct other required street improvements which will benefit traffic movement and flow; 3. That the conditions of approval proposed for Commission Review and Approval No. 834 (R1) 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; Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 8 4. That the use is desirable for the overall development of the community; once developed the project will provide on-site improvements that will contribute to the development of the overall area and provide employment opportunities within the city; 5. The proposed project will be consistent with the existing Commercial/Industrial Designation of the General Plan and the Commercial Industrial District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. This includes the addition of condition of approval number forty-six (46)and forty-seven (47) as follows: 46. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of the detention basins that provides a design that meets the minimum depth necessary to meet State Water Quality Control Board standards. 47. The applicant shall work with staff on the design of the ramps located at the east and west sides of building "C"to provide a design that meets the minimum length necessary to comply with ADA, (American with Disabilities Act), requirements. F. ESRI, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) 1. Consideration of a Negative Declaration. 2. Consideration of COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL NO. 861 to construct an automobile parking lot containing 87 parking spaces on 1.03 acres located on the south side of Plum Lane, approximately 200 feet east of Idaho Street in the Office/Industrial District of Specific Plan 25. Commissioner Miller recused himself from the meeting at 3:25 p.m. due to a conflict of interest. Assistant Director Robert Dalquest indicated that the project was continued from the meeting of January 13, 2009 to allow the applicant additional time to notify all surrounding neighbors. Mr. Dalquest stated that the applicant is requesting a continuance to the February 10, 2009 meeting to complete their contact with the adjacent property owners. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Macdonald and carried on a 6-0 vote, (Commissioner Miller recused), that the Planning Commission continue Commission Review and Approval No. 861 to the meeting of February 10, 2009. Commissioner Miller returned to the meeting at 3:27 p.m. IV. NEW BUSINESS - None V. ADDENDA A. Significant Project presentation to the Planning Commission by Walmart Stores, Inc. for a proposed 275,500 square foot shopping center consisting of a 215,000 square foot Walmart store, nine (9) out-parcels with approximately 60,500 square feet of various commercial and retail uses, and four (4) parcels for professional office uses that are not proposed to be developed at this time on a total of 45.71 gross acres located on the southeast corner of San Bernardino Avenue and Tennessee Street in Concept Plan No 4 of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Assistant Director Robert Dalquest gave an overview of the project and introduced project representative Pat Meyer, Urban Environs, who would be doing the presentation. Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 9 Pat Meyer, Urban Environs, gave a PowerPoint presentation and an overview of the proposed Super Wal-Mart and indicated that the site is properly zoned for the use of the land. Mr. Meyer showed detailed site plans and elevations of the project site. Commissioner Miller commented on the storm water retention basin that is identified at the southern end of the property. Mr. Meyer stated that he would speak about the basin during his presentation. Mr. Meyer gave an overview of the basins indicating that runoff is a big concern and that they have to design detention basins not only for the low flow but for the large peak storms. Mr. Meyer commented on the existing Walmart facility and indicated that Walmart has a real estate division that is committed to recycling those facilities. Mr. Meyer indicated that the Walmart centers are becoming greener and are committed to recycling their materials. Mr. Meyer stated that there would be another Scoping meeting and asked Mr. Dalquest when it would approximately take place. Mr. Dalquest stated that it would take place in the latter part of February, 2009. Mr. Meyer introduced John Mendez who is a Public Affairs Officer for Walmart. Mr. Mendez introduced himself to the Commission and indicated that he has been working with Mr. Meyer on the Walmart project. He stated that he looked forward getting together in dialoguing with community residents and groups to share information relative to their intentions of the project. Chairman Foster asked the Commission if there were any questions for Mr. Meyer relative to the project. Commissioner Macdonald asked what retail stores would surround the parameter of the project. Mr. Meyer indicated that it was too early to speak with tenants since they would come into the picture three to four years down the road in terms of occupancy. Mr. Meyer indicated that the mix of tenants would be food and retail. Commissioner Miller stated that it would be helpful if examples could be provided on some of the uses that have moved into Walmart vacated buildings. Commissioner Miller indicated that there was an absence of detail on the trim around the windows and remarked that there was not a lot of breaking up of the parapet which would enhance the final product. Commissioner Miller stated that the side that faces the future offices is fairly plain and that something needs to done there so the views from the offices can be enhanced. Commissioner Dyer commented on the back elevation of the building that faces residential development and indicated that the architectural detailing needs to be done more similarly to the front elevation. She had a general concern with the architectural theme of the entire site indicating that it appeared to be like a shopping center. Commissioner Dyer stated that there needed to be some architectural standards or guidelines of consistency between the out buildings. Commissioner Dyer commented that the center is facing major parameter streets and are getting a back view of buildings which is somewhat typical to facing into the parking lot which needs to be addressed. Commissioner Dyer commented on the one way driving aisles indicating that they create congestion with people cycling around the lots and the ninety(90) degree parking in other areas and would like some justification why there is that type of angled parking. Commissioner Dyer stated that the detention basins looks like a potential shopping cart and trash area and that the design of that will be important. Commissioner Dyer commented on the huge stand of Eucalyptus trees and would like those trees recognized in the EIR, (Environmental Impact Report), in addition to possibly being retained. Mr. Meyer indicated that there will be significant widening to do on San Bernardino Avenue and that there would be no way to save the Eucalyptus trees since they are in the right-a-way. Commissioner Dyer indicated that the landscaping is substantial on this project and the conceptual plan does not really show what is proposed. Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 10 Commissioner Shamp asked for the status of the proposed Walmart sites in Yucaipa and Highland. Mr. Meyer indicated that Walmart is moderating their growth and that Redlands is the site that Walmart wants to pursue at this time. Commissioner Shamp stated that we will be looking at the cost benefit analysis and had concerns in what he will see in that analysis. He will have questions relative to what percentage of this Walmart sales will be coming from new spending in this City, not just sales tax revenue transferred from one entity to another entity and sustainability. Commissioner Cook had concerns relative to the existing site and commented on its decline indicating that Walmart has not been a very good steward to that site. She would like to see specific examples of stores that Walmart has brought into their existing sites that they vacate. In addition, Commissioner Cook would like to see the impacts that Super Walmart has on a community and the difference between the sales revenue that we already have at that existing site compared to building at another site. Commissioner Cook indicated that there are stone curbs which should reflect the historical nature of those in the area. Chairman Foster stated that he would like to see some photographic materials or examples of other upscale Super Walmart's across the country. Chairman Foster commented that he is grateful for the fact that we have the opportunity to look at a major retailer coming into our community and being interested in building and looks forward to the process. VI. MINUTES A. January 13, 2009 It was moved by Commissioner Macdonald, seconded by Commissioner Cook and carried on a 7-0 vote to approve the minutes of January 13, 2009. VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF JANUARY 20, 2009. Director Oscar Orci reported that there were no land use actions at the City Council meeting of January 20, 2009. Chairman Foster acknowledged the reappointment of Vice Chairman Gary Miller to the Planning Commission for another four years. VIII. ADJOURN TO FEBRUARY 10, 2009 Chairman Foster adjourned the meeting at 4:04 p.m. to the Special Meeting of February 3, 2009 at 1:30 p.m. Christine Szilva Oscar Orci, Director Senior Administrative Assistant Community Development Department Planning Commission Minutes of January 27, 2009 Page 11 Planning Commission Minutes of January 13, 2009 Page 12