Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 10-12-10_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES: of the Planning Commission Meeting of the City of Redlands held Tuesday, October 12, 2010, at 2:00 p.m. are as follows: PRESENT: Paul Foster, Chairman Gary Miller, Vice Chairman Carol Dyer, Commissioner Conrad Guzkowski, Commissioner Jan Hudson, Commissioner John James, Commissioner Eric Shamp, Commissioner ADVISORY STAFF Dan McHugh, City Attorney PRESENT: Oscar Orci, Development Services Director Robert Dalquest, Assistant Development Services Director Manuel Baeza, Principal Planner Tabitha Kevari, Associate Planner Chris Boatman, Associate Planner I. CALL TO ORDER AND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - 3 MINUTES Chairman Foster called the meeting to order, and opened up the Public Comment period. There were no comments forthcoming and the Public Comment period was closed. All members were present. II. CONSENT ITEM A. UNCLE HOWIE'S, INC., APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: ROBERT D. DALQUEST, AICP) Review of ABC application for the person to person transfer of an On- Sale Beer and Wine license for Uncle Howie's Pizza, Inc. located at 800 E. Lugonia Avenue, Suite A. Chairman Foster opened up the hearing. There were no comments forthcoming and the hearing was closed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Vice Chairman Miller, and carried on a 6-0 vote (Commissioner Shamp tardy) to approve the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Shamp arrived. III. OLD BUSINESS - None IV. NEW BUSINESS A. QUIEL BROS ELECTRIC SIGN SERVICE COMPANY, INC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) 1. Consideration of a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 1 2. Consideration of REVISION NO. 1 TO COMMISSION SIGN REVIEW NO. 329 to modify an approved sign program for an office and retail complex to allow signage on the west elevation of Building No. 4 located east of Ford Street and south of the 1-10 Freeway within Specific Plan No. 23. Associate Planner Tabitha Kevari gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff indicated support of the request to amend the sign program and to allow signs on all elevations (including the west elevations), but not the south elevation. Staff is not supportive of allowing up to three building signs per tenant. Thus the sign program provisions for Building No. 4 would remain and allow up to two building signs per tenant. Commissioner Dyer requested clarification on the third sign to orient clients. Associate Planner Kevari stated the sign program prohibits any signage on the west elevation. The applicant proposed to amend the sign program to allow signage on the west elevation, and is requesting a third sign. At the time that staff had reviewed the sign program the residential development was not completed and staff was not sure how the residents would be impacted. The south elevation sits across the street from the residents. Staff is supportive of allowing signage on the west side, and is recommending the signage limited to a maximum of two (2) per tenant. Commissioner Guzkowski stated the building has a sign on the west elevation that reads Dermatology on the glass, and inquired if the sign would be considered a third sign. Assistant Director Robert Dalquest stated the sign code allows window signs up to a maximum of twenty-five (25)percent of the window area, and is not considered a third sign. Chairman Foster opened up the hearing. Ms. Sheri Stahlheber, representative, had photos to share with the commission. Ms. Stahlheber stated when entering into the complex there is no sign. Commissioner Guzkowski stated when entering into the complex the window sign is prominent. Ms. Stahlheber said the applicant's clients are having problems locating them. Commissioner Dyer inquired if the applicant was willing to remove the third sign if the proposed sign was approved. Ms. Stahlheber stated the existing signs are expensive, and the applicant does not want to remove them. Commissioner Dyer inquired if this would be an exception to the sign criteria. Commissioner Guzkowski inquired if there were any other buildings in the complex with the same limitations. Assistant Director Dalquest confirmed there were other buildings with three signs. Commissioner Guzkowski stated he is not in support of a third sign. Vice Chairman Miller stated there are two (2) tenants on each floor and are allowed to have two (2) signs each. Vice Chairman Miller stated he is in support of a third (3) sign if the tenant occupied a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the building. Commissioner James inquired if the proposal was for the entire building or just for Building No. 4. Associate Planner Kevari confirmed the proposal is for Building No. 4. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 2 Commissioner James stated he concurred with Vice Chairman Miller's comments. Assistant Director Dalquest said staff could make a recommendation that if a tenant had fifty percent of the net leasable space, they could have three signs. Commissioner Dyer inquired if the applicant occupied fifty percent of the net gross floor area. Associate Planner Kevari stated the applicant does not occupy fifty percent of the second floor. Commissioner Shamp stated that he was supportive of the additional signage if it was determined that Building No. 4 has unique characteristics not applicable to the other buildings in the center. Commissioner Guzkowski inquired if Commissioner Shamp is recommending an additional sign on the westside of the building. Commissioner Shamp confirmed and stated Building No. 4 would have equal rights as the other buildings. Director Oscar Orci stated that he wanted to clarify Commissioner Shamp's comments, and that the additional signage was due to the building's unique location and limited visibility. By allowing the sign on the western elevation they are given the same rights as the other buildings. Assistant Director Dalquest confirmed there are four mandatory findings required by state law, and stated the sign code could be amended. Commissioner Shamp recommended amending the sign code to allow Building No. 4 freeway signs in both directions, as the other buildings have. Also, to allow non- illuminated signage for Building No. 4. Chairman Foster inquired if the commission should continue the item to allow staff the time to incorporate the commission's comments into a recommendation. Director Orci stated we could continue the item, or staff could make the necessary modifications and findings of fact today. Chairman Foster stated he would prefer the item continued. Commissioner James inquired if the modification was for the sign program, or the sign code. Associate Planner Kevari stated the modification is for the sign program. Commissioner Guzkowski stated he is in support of a continuance. Vice Chairman Miller stated a desire to reduce clutter, and he is in support of a continuance. Director Orci clarified the two ideas from the commission. First, to allow additional signage, with at least fifty percent gross leasable space; and second, because of the orientation of Building No. 4 the additional signage would be justified. Commissioner Dyer stated she concurred with Commissioner Shamp's comments. Commissioner Dyer understands Vice Chairman Miller's concern with sign clutter but stated if the rest if the sign criterion is kept in place the other buildings would only have up to two signs with the exception of Building No. 4. Commissioner James stated Building No. 3 does not have a freeway sign. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 3 There was discussion on the signage for the buildings. Commissioner Guzkowski recommended changing the gross leasable space to forty percent instead of fifty percent. Commissioner Dyer recommended additional wood signs on the frontage of Building No. 3 facing the parking lot, to direct clients to the tenants. Director Orci stated it would add another component to the sign program and staff would then need to obtain approval from the center to amend the sign program and allow these sign types. Director Orci stated staff has two points of view and will bring both back to the commission for further discussion. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Guzkowski, seconded by Commissioner Hudson and carried on a 7-0 vote to continue Revision No. 1 to Commission Sign Review No. 329 to the November 9, 2010 meeting. B. CITY OF REDLANDS, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: TABITHA KEVARI) 1. Consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a recommendation to the City Council on ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 329 to modify Section 18.156.460(B) of the Redlands Municipal Code by allowing tandem parking to satisfy the parking requirement for second dwelling units. Associate Planner Kevari gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of the proposed Ordinance Text Amendment No. 329. Vice Chairman Miller stated if the city does not find ways to make more affordable homes available, the City would be out of compliance with the state mandated General Plan. Assistant Director Dalquest stated when the Housing Element was updated the provisions were reviewed. The second dwelling unit provision did not allow tandem parking. The State suggested an amendment to the code to allow tandem parking to the requirements. Vice Chairman Miller inquired if the city chooses not to amend the code would there be penalties from the state. Director Orci confirmed. Commissioner Shamp inquired if there were impacts to affordable housing. Assistant Director Dalquest stated there would be little to no impacts, and it would make it easier for second dwelling units to comply with the criteria on the parking standards. Commissioner Shamp expressed concern that the amendment may have a significant effect on neighborhoods and on affordable housing. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 4 Chairman Foster opened up the Public Hearing. There were no comments forthcoming and the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Guzkowski stated he was in support of the amendment. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council determine that Ordinance Text Amendment No. 329 is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061 b(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commissioner Dyer and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 1212 and recommend that the City Council approve Ordinance Text Amendment No. 329 to Section 18.156.460(B) of the Redlands Municipal Code. C. BEN BIDART, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) 1. Consideration of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider a Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study. 3. PUBLIC HEARING to consider TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16402 to subdivide approximately 8.48 acres into twenty six (26) single family residential lots and one (1) lettered lot for open space purposes located south of Madeira Avenue and west of Sapphire Avenue in the R-E (Residential Estate) District and R-1 (Single Family Residential) District. Associate Planner Chris Boatman gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of the proposed project. Vice Chairman Miller requested clarification on Condition of Approval No. 26 and the proposed maintenance from the Homeowners Association (HOA). Associate Planner Boatman stated the individual homeowners will maintain the slope and the hedge row is maintained by the HOA. Vice Chairman Miller inquired if the HOA could go on private property to maintain the hedge row. City Attorney Dan McHugh confirmed the HOA could maintain the area with the appropriate easement. Vice Chairman Miller recommended the HOA maintain the easement area rather than the individual homeowners, in order to have a consistent style of maintenance. Vice Chairman Miller requested additional shade trees on lots 1-8. Associate Planner Boatman stated he would add an additional condition of approval. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 5 Commissioner Dyer requested clarification if lots 9-18 had a hedge row proposed. Associate Planner Boatman stated lots 9-18 did not have a hedge row, but will be landscaped with trees. Commissioner Dyer inquired what landscaping was proposed for common lots A and B. Associate Planner Boatman stated the common lots are part of the Water Quality Management Plan (W.Q.M.P.) and will be landscaped and irrigated. Assistant Director Dalquest stated a landscape plan is part of the requirement when the Residential Development Allocation is submitted. Chairman Foster opened up the Public Hearing. Mr. Bud Thatcher, representative, stated he agreed the HOA would be more consistent in maintaining the easement. Mr. Thatcher requested staff revise page five (5) of the staff report to reflect the revision made to the condition of approval under (Grading and Drainage) and he requested the wording be changed from "responsibility of each homeowner to maintain" to "responsibility of the Home Owners Association to maintain." Mr. Thatcher stated there was an error on page three (3) of the staff report under 4 (General Plan Consistency) and he requested the wording be changed from "549 linear feet of sewer" to 1,482 linear feet of sewer." Mr. Thatcher stated there was an error on Condition of Approval No. 26 and he requested the wording be changed from "and within lots 21-23." to "and within lots 21-23, and along the easterly side of lots 16 and 17." Associate Planner Boatman concurred. Commissioner Dyer inquired if there would be a gate at the end of the open space for the HOA to have access for maintenance. Mr. Thatcher stated there would be a gate on each lot. Vice Chairman Miller inquired if the applicant had any concerns regarding maintenance on lots 16, 17, 21 and 22. Mr. Thatcher stated the area is smaller and would not require maintenance from the HOA. Chairman Foster closed the Public Hearing. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Vice Chairman Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract No.16402, and direct staff to file and post a "Notice of Determination" in accordance with City guidelines. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Vice Chairman Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study for Tentative Tract No. 16402. It has been determined that this project will not create unmitigable physical blight or over burden public services in the community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Vice Chairman Miller and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract No. 16402, subject to the following findings and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval: Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 6 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 Density Residential and a zoning of R-E (Residential Estate) District and R-1 (Single Family Residential) District and is consistent with both the General Plan and Municipal Code; 2. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. The site and its Topography are suited for the design of the subdivision into (26) lots and all required infrastructure to accommodate the proposed density; 3. The site is physically suitable for the density of development of a twenty six (26) lot subdivision. The design of the subdivision equates to 2.91 dwelling units per acre which is well within the prescribed density of the Low Density Residential general plan designation, as well as all necessary public and private improvements; 4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is 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 and is not likely to cause any serious public health problems, aside from temporary air quality and noise impacts during construction activities which are addressed in the Mitigation Measure for this subdivision; 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; the project will accommodate existing easements and all streets will be public; 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. This includes the modification of condition of approval number twenty-six (26) as follows: 26. In order to mitigate potential impacts as identified in Section I(c) of the Initial Study Checklist, the applicant shall establish a drainage easement along the western portion of the subdivision, and within lots 1-8 and 21-23 and along the easterly side of lot 16 and 17. There shall be a tubular steel fence at the top of the slope and the area between this fence and the perimeter subdivision wall shall be landscaped and maintained by the home owners association within lots 1-8. A shrub row shall be installed to the west of the fence for screening purposes. This shall also be identified within the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions agreement, which is required and will be conditioned on the project. To be monitored by the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, prior to the issuance of building permits. (Mitigation Measure No. 1). D. HOSANNA INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 7 1. Consideration of a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 972 to establish a religious place of worship within an existing multi-tenant commercial center located at 34 W. Colton Avenue in the C-4 (Highway Commercial) District. Associate Planner Boatman gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of the proposed project. Chairman Foster stated the congregation may grow up to 150 to 200 members and requested clarification on the limited parking. Chairman Foster expressed concern with the possible overflow parking that may arise. Associate Planner Boatman stated he had discussed the parking and attendee maximums with the applicant. Currently the applicant has six members and if his congregation grows to sixty members or more, he may be able to expand to occupy an adjoining suite. The applicant could amend the conditional use permit to accommodate additional parking. Chairman Foster inquired if off-site parking was available. Associate Planner Boatman stated if the applicant was to expand into another suite he would have more parking. Chairman Foster asked if there had been any communication regarding the proposal with the other tenants. Associate Planner Boatman confirmed there was no communication on the proposal with the other tenants. Assistant Director Dalquest stated the applicant is planning on having multiple services. The total parking is limited to sixty-three occupants at any one time. Vice Chairman Miller stated the staff report indicates the current tenants are open Monday through Friday; some of the tenants are retail businesses which would normally include Sunday. Vice Chairman Miller expressed concern on the impacts regarding the hours of operation. Vice Chairman Miller inquired if it was appropriate to request the owner of the property to paint the building a solid color to cover the graffiti. Vice Chairman Miller stated the parking stalls on the northwest corner needed restriping. Director Orci stated a provision could be added, if the property owner agreed to it, and staff would advise code enforcement of the added provision. Chairman Foster asked what would happen if the property owner did not agree with the provision. Director Orci stated the City could not impose the provision if the property owner was not in agreement. Director Orci stated sanctuaries attendance fluctuates and it is difficult to regulate their operations. It is useful to put controls on their operational characteristics so that they do not burden the surrounding tenants or parking requirements. Director Orci recommended adding the appropriate conditions to mitigate the amount of services and provide minimums and maximums, with benchmarks. When the applicant reaches those maximums they would need to come back to the City and revise their Conditional Use Permit. Vice Chairman Miller requested stronger language regarding off street parking. Director Orci stated staff can modify the condition to prohibit off street parking. Commissioner Guzkowski recommended duplicating the language for the hours of operation as described in the staff report to Condition of Approval No. 10. Associate Planner Boatman stated he would modify Condition of Approval No. 10. Director Orci recommended continuing the item to allow staff time to work with the applicant to address the concerns of the commission. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 8 Chairman Foster opened up the Public Hearing. Reverend Mel Garber and Ms. Jacqueline Garber, representative, expressed concern with the parking and requested staff reconsider the parking maximums. Ms. Garber stated there are no vacant tenant spaces to expand into. The tenants that occupy the site include a 99 ¢ Store and a Pizza Restaurant with very little seating, and they would not have an impact. Ms. Garber stated the property owner said all of the parking on site was available to them. Associate Planner Boatman confirmed he had spoken to the property owner and they did say the applicant had free access to all of the available parking. Associate Planner Boatman confirmed there are other retail businesses that are open during the weekend. Director Orci recommended staff work with the applicant to identify their operational characteristics and their growth projections and set milestones, and then bring that back to the commission. Ms. Garber stated they have been paying the lease since July and it is causing a hardship for them. Commissioner Hudson inquired if there is a site security plan. Ms. Garber stated they have deacons that will provide security. Chairman Foster closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Dyer stated the west side of the building has a mural that has been marked with graffiti which has been painted over with different shades of paint. Commissioner Dyer recommended the entire Westside of the building be painted with one color of paint. Associate Planner Boatman concurred and stated he will add additional language to paint the west elevation to match the south elevation in the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner James concurred with Director Orci to continue the item. Commissioner James requested staff make sure that we define the occupancy for the building size. Commissioner Dyer concurred with Commissioner James and recommended additional language to prohibit off street parking. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Guzkowski, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission move to continue the Conditional Use Permit No. 972 to the November 9, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. E. ORANGE STREET PLAZA LLC, APPLICANT (PROJECT PLANNER: MANUEL BAEZA) 1. Consideration of a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 2. PUBLIC HEARING to consider CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 975 to establish a gym in an existing 5,200 square foot building located at 500 Orange Street within the Orange Street Plaza (Vons Shopping Center) located on the southeast corner of Orange Street and Pearl Avenue in the Town Center District of Downtown Specific Plan No. 45. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 9 Principal Planner Manuel Baeza gave a PowerPoint presentation and overview of the proposed project. Staff recommended approval of the proposed project. Commissioner Guzkowski requested clarification on the potential occupancy. Principal Planner Baeza stated it could be up to fifty or sixty people at one time. Commissioner Hudson expressed concerns on safety; the average membership is six hundred participants with a maximum membership of 1,500. Principal Planner Baeza stated the parking requirements would still be met with the maximum membership. Assistant Director Dalquest stated the Fire Marshal will establish the occupancy for the building based on the fire code. Commissioner Dyer inquired if the public could see inside the building on Orange Street. Principal Planner Baeza could not confirm. Chairman Foster opened up the Public Hearing. Mr. Scott Stirlicker, center representative, stated the proposed use is a good fit for the center. Mr. Andy Arturi, applicant representative, stated he is available for any questions. Commissioner Dyer requested clarification on the anticipated membership. Mr. Arturi stated an average for other clubs that have a membership of 700 would have 5-7 members using the facility at a time. For this club the average would be 10-14 members using the club at one time. Director Orci requested the applicant describe the differences between their club and other franchise clubs. Mr. Arturi stated their club is more of a boutique with high end equipment and is geared towards personal training. The classroom will have videos of palettes and aerobics for individual use. Mr. Arturi confirmed the windows off of Orange Street will have dark tinted windows, and the north side of the building will have a lighter tint on the windows. Commissioner Guzkowski inquired if the facility is typically oriented towards men or women. Mr. Arturi stated the facility is oriented more towards women. Commissioner Guzkowski asked if the facility is busy during the off hours. Mr. Arturi stated there is only ten (10) percent in attendance during the off hours. Commissioner Guzkowski inquired if there has been communication with the other tenants in the center. Mr. Stirlicker stated they have been monitoring the parking at different times of the day, and there are ten to fifteen parking stalls available around the building. Commissioner Dyer inquired if they have considered dedicated parking spaces for the facility. Mr. Stirlicker stated the CC & R's do no allow dedicated parking. Commissioner Shamp recommended the applicant add a bike rack near the facility. Vice Chairman Miller recommended the applicant consider a typical tint on the west side of the building windows, and then install programmable shades to roll down in the evening for safety and security. Commissioner Guzkowski stated he was in favor of the proposed project. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 10 Commissioner Dyer stated she was in favor of the proposed project. MOTION It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission determine that Conditional Use Permit No. 975 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines. It was moved by Commissioner Shamp, seconded by Commissioner James, and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 975, subject to the following findings, submitted plans, and attached conditions of approval: 1. The proposed health club will not adversely affect the applicable land use plans of the City. The project is located in Downtown Specific Plan No. 45. This Plan states that its primary goal is to create compact, pedestrian oriented environments that are consistent with the Redlands Town Center. The Plan encourages local employment, shopping, service, and entertainment facilities that will further strengthen the downtown area. The proposed health club is considered a service use, and therefore is consistent with the Specific Plan's goals. 2. The health club will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare. The project will be located in a freestanding building within the Orange Street Plaza. The building has been designed to meet State and local standards for building safety and no structural changes are proposed to the building. In addition, conditions of approval have been placed on the project to insure safety. 3. The new health club will comply with the regulations of the City's General Plan, the applicable land use district and the City's development standards because the proposed project meets the on-site parking requirements; is a permitted use with the approval of a conditional use permit; and conditions of approval have been applied to the project to ensure that development standards are met; and, 4. The project is appropriate at the proposed location in that the use is conditionally permitted within Downtown Specific Plan No. 45; the applicant will provide appropriate safeguards to ensure customer safety; the applicant will have adequate parking facilities; and the health club use will not create an adverse effect on surrounding properties or businesses. V. ADDENDA A. Memo discussing the property owner's rights relative to substantial tree trimming within the site of the 7-11 Store located at the southwest corner of Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard. Associate Planner Chris Boatman gave a brief presentation and overview of the tree trimming preformed at the 7-11 located at the southwest corner of Alabama Street and Redlands Boulevard. Vice Chairman Miller requested clarification why Section 18 of the Municipal Code does not apply to the site. Associate Planner Boatman stated the entitlement was processed and approved in 1986; Section 18 of the Municipal Code was amended in 2002. Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 11 City Attorney Dan McHugh stated there is a concept of legal non conforming uses and vested rights. When there are new provisions to a project, staff would then review the entitlement and bring it up to the current code. Commissioner Dyer recommended when staff has a revision to an entitlement to add a requirement to comply with the new code requirements. Director Orci stated the current provisions address the commissions concerns, and staff is applying the new provisions to developments and or properties that are being upgraded. VI. MINUTES A. September 14, 2010 MOTION It was moved by Commissioner James, seconded by Commission Hudson and carried on a 7-0 vote that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of September 14, 2010 VII. LAND USE AND CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS OF SEPTEMBER 21, 2010. Chairman Foster inquired if there were City Council actions to report for September 21, 2010. Director Orci stated there were no reportable actions. Commissioner James stated there was an air show at the Redlands Airport which was very well attended. There were six to seven thousand people there. The development for the area with Hanger 24 and the Skate Park drew a lot of citizens, and recommended encouraging similar uses at the airport, to improve the economic venue for the area. VIII. ADJOURN TO NOVEMBER 9, 2010 Chairman Foster adjourned the meeting at 4:10 p.m. to the November 9, 2010 meeting. Linda McCasland Oscar Orci Senior Administrative Technician Development Services Director Planning Commission Minutes of October 12,2010 Page 12