The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996/03/27 - Agenda Packet - Workshop CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY MARCH 27, 1996 6:00 P .M. WORKSHOP RANCBO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER RAINS ROOM 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I. Roll Call Chairman Barker Commissioner Melcher Vice Chairman McNiel __ Commissioner Tolstoy Commissioner Lumpp II. Announcements III. Old Business A. .CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-16 - SACRED HEART CATHOLIC CHURCH - A discussion of the bells to be used at a church facility and school on a 20.14 acre site in the Very Low Residential designation (1-2 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, between Summit and Highland Avenues - APN: 225-171-12, 20, 22, and 23. IV. Public Comments This is the time andplace for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. V. Commission Business VI. Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11: O0 P. M~ adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I, Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certi that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 21, 1996, at least 72 hours prior to t~Ye meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. / VICINITY MAP 'k CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21, I996 TO: C irman and Members of the Planning Commission FR rad Buller, City Planner B . Scott Murphy, AICP, Associate Planner ~RED HEART CHURCH BELL WORKSHOP On Wednesday, March 27, 1996, at 6:00 p.m., the Planning Commission will be conducting a workshop to discuss the bells proposed for Sacred Heart Church's new location on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, south of Summit Avenue. In preparation for the workshop, enclosed find the minutes from the Planning Commission public hearing of January 24, 1996, and the letter received from Father Gaglia regarding possible modifications to the bell program. Staff has been in contact with Father Gaglia and requested a tape of the bells be available for the workshop. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me or Scott. Attachments ITEM 12704 FOOTHILL BLVD. ' RANCHO CUCA~,~ONGA. CALIFORNIA 91739-9795 PHONE (9091899-1049 February 26, 1996 Mr. E. David Barker, Chairman Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga PO Bos 807 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Dear Mr. Barker: We are willing to work with you regarding the resolution .......... 6f'the Planning Division' report section 9, page 4 of your commissions's resolution 96-04. However, we do not nor can we give up any constitution rites we have in the matter, or that have been granted to us by pertinent review of case law and decisions of judicial jurdisdictions. We would offer the following for consideration: 1. The orientation of the speakers will be as in the present arrangement, namely facing north and south. This will not make the sound go directly to the east where the present housing development is located. 2. The time for sacred hymns to be played will be reduced to 5 minutes from the previous 7.5 minutes. Finally sound levels should not be considered a problem given the distances'from the source of the bells to the nearest homes, and the studies done at our present site. Please confer the letter enclosed to verify that there is no significant noise disturbance. In fact the noiselfrom cars and trucks is higher than the bells and in a room conversation tested is approximately the same. Thus in a home the housing materials and any insulation would be a buffer in and of itself. We hope that this will be helpful. Sincerely, Fr. Fred R. Gaglia, Ph.D. Pastor SCHULMERICH CARILLONS, INC. Feb. 13, 1996 Sacred Heart Catholic Church 12722 Foothill Blvd. Etiwanda, Ca. 91730 Attention Father Gaglie: At t1~e request of your office i came to your church last Friday Feb. 9th, to take Sound Reading Measurements for the C~ri!!on instrument. The Carillon is a Novabell N25, installed in February, !993. ..... - ~i have given your secretary information regarding the verious sound levels which are considered normal in any environment. The instrdment I used is a Realistic Sound Level Meter, 42-30!9. i look readings at approximately 660 feet from the tower, and also at approximately 1300 feet. I listened to the bells as they played on various songs, and the Hour Strike. 6e0 Ft. readings ranged from 65 to 75 Db. I used the C Weighring, and~ _c the slow and fast response. ~=-t~ both , !300 Ft. readings ranged from 65 Db to 70 Db. using the C Weighring and both slow and fast response. To get comparisons ! also tested the sound level at the street in front of the church, and got an average of 80 Db for cars and up to 97Db for trucks. i also tested the instrument in conversation inside and at 10 ft. measured 65 Db- if i can be of further assistance please let me know. District Manager, So. C~. Schulmerich Carillons Inc. 373 N. Cedar St. ~ Orange, Ca. 92668 (714) 978-27!2 The bell capital of the world. Carillon Hi]] - RO. Box 903 - Sel]ersvHle, FA 18960-0903 - 2~5-257-2771 property. He said there had been complaints at that location about activities in the parking lot. He rather than using doormen. He said that there was a disruption in the neighborhood when the d~'~r was left open. He acknowledged that Mr. Rausa is trying. He observed thal the consultant indic-~ied a canopy could be installed by the door but the applicant had stated the he is a small business~wner and cannot afford to spend a lot of money He was concerned it will not work. He comp i'nented outdoor eating and drinking and he felt that would also be disruptive· / Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the resolution approyi'ng Entertainment Permit 93-03 with modification to require additional sound attenuation around tb(~existing exit doors to mitigate the escape of noise as people enter and exit· ,ra,~the Commissioner Melcher felt that this is not a neighborhood bar, but r a bar on a major thoroughfare and a different case from the other bar which was refer.,ef~ced by the Commissioners. He suggested the design of the proposed canopy modification betsubmitted to staff along with a commentary by the acoustical engineer prior to installation. ,." The motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: LUMPP MELCHER .......... i'~OE~:" BARKER, MCNIEL ABSENT TOLSTOY : - · Commissioner Tolstoy would be pref' hairman Barker reopened the pub '~hearing. He stated that a copy of the minutes would be made available to Commissioner T..~ly. i :a Moved by M~elc 'r. seconded by McNiel, to continue Entedainment Permit 93-03 to February 14. 1996. Me ' n carried by the following vote: AYES: BARK , LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NOES:NO : _. C. VARIANCE 95--04 - SACRED HEART CATHOLIC CHURCH - A request to exceed the maximum height limit of 35 feet for the construction of a church facility on 20.14 acres of land in the Very Low Residential designation (1-2 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, between Summit and Highland Avenues - APN: 225-171-12, 20, 22, and 23. Associated with the application is Conditional Use Permit 95-16 and Tree Removal Permit 95-14. Planning Commission Minutes {LZ:~ -7- January 24, 1996 J D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-16 - SACRED HEART CATHOLIC CHURCH - A request to construct a church facility and school consisting of a 31.017 square foot church, a 28,480 square foot community center, a 16,460 square foot education center, a 10,898 square foot parish center office. a 9,400 square foot rectory, a 10,110 square foot adult education and youth center, a 5,180 square foot chapel, and a 9,387 square foot adult center on a 20.14 acre site in the Very Low Residential designation dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, between Summit and Highland Avenues - APN: 225-171-12, 20, 22, and 23. Staff recommends issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Associated with the application is Variance 95-04 and Tree Removal Permit 95-14. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He stated that the plans posted this evening reflect an increased height for the bell tower up to 72 feet. additional stone work around some of the arches, and a dormer-style window treatment on the community center and church building. He noted that staff had received a call from a resident voicing concern about the impact of the bells. He slated staff was concerned that the bells may be an intrusion on the residential area and had recommended that the bells not be allowed for the church but it was not staff's intent to limit the school bells. He repoded that the adjacent properly owner to the southwest had submitted a letter requesting a wall along the eastern border of lhe church properly where it abuts his property. Commissioner McNiel questioned if the applicant had made all the changes which were requested at the January 2 Design Review Committee meeting. ............ I~'r. i'~L~rphy replied that some had been incorporated into the plans shown this evening, including some additional stone work and arches on the rear of the community center building and a similar arch treatment to the walls on both sides of the rotunda. He noted that the Committee had suggested some statues might be added to the rotunda area. Commissioner Lumpp asked if a wall is not being built around the entire property. Mr. Murphy replied that a wrought iron fence will be around lhe perimeter with a block wall with wrought iron on lop being installed only in the areas where a retaining wall would be required. Commissioner Lumpp asked where the adjoining property owner wanted the wall to be placed. Mr. Murphy responded that the properly owner wanted the wall to be extended to the south along the east property line to the end of the playground. Commissioner McNiel asked if the wall would be at the foot of the slope. Mr. Murphy replied it would be at the top of the slope. Commissioner Melcher asked the width of the two driveways going out to the east end of the properly. Mr. Murphy replied it is 26 feet, the same as a typical perimeter drive aisle in a shopping center. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Father Gaglia, Sacred Heart Church, 12704 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had been surprised by the proposed condition prohibiting the use of the bells. He requested that the condition be deleted. He believed that a church has unique functions in a community because it is a unique entity. He staled that church bells are traditional in the Roman Catholic church and remarked that bells were in each mission and along rural highways of early California. He said they -have used bells at their present location since it opened in 1953 and had never been told that they Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 24, 1996 are offensive. He felt the bells lend a sense of peacefulness, rather than being a nuisance. He stated that bells are allowed at all the other schools in the City and said it is necessary to sound the school bells throughout the day as classes change, etc. He noted they also have a monthly fire drill. Chairman Barker asked Father Gaglia to describe the pattern and frequency of bell ringing. Father Gag[in responded that, at present, the bells start at 6:00 a.m. He stated that at 6:00 a.m.. 12:00 noon, and 6:00 p.m., the bells ring for approximately 14 seconds with three sequences of three peals each followed by 21 additional rings. He said the bells ring every quatier hour from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with 3 dings at the quatier hour, 6 dings at the half hour, 9 dings at the three-quader hour and 12 rings followed by a ding for each hour on the hour. He reported that at 9:00 a.m., 12:00 noon, and 5:00 p.m., they ring three additional religious hymns. taking approximately seven minutes each time. He indicated the pattern changes on Saturdays and Sundays to accommodate the mass schedule. He said on Saturdays it rings the aforementioned pattern until 5:00 p.m., then through the hour of 7:00 p.m. and the hour of 8:00 p.m. He stated that on Sundays it rings at 6:00 a.m. and then no hourly rings, but a call to mass at 7:30 a.m., 9:30 a.m.. and 11:30 a.m., followed by the regular hourly rings from 1:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. Pat Van Daele, 2900 Adams Street, Suite C-25, Riverside, stated he was speaking on behalf of the church. He said their preference was to maintain the wall plan as proposed. He believed there is adequate screening for the residential neighborhood and remarked there is a grade differential between the church site and the area currently zoned for future residential. He felt the additional ....... pl_ant. ipg along '~_he church perimeter will provide adequate screening. Mike Cocktell, 12966 Cherokee Road. Rancho Cucamonga. stated he lives a couple hundred feet from the bells. He expressed surprise with how far along the project had progressed. He acknowledged that when he moved into his home, signs were up saying future relocation site of the church, but said he and his neighbors were greatly taken back by the size and scope of the operation. He thought most people would feel that a church should not be 120,000 square feet. He felt it is not a church, but a big business roughly the size of a grocery store. pharmacy. bank. video store, and fast food restaurant combined. He felt it is a seven day a week, 365 days a year, morning until night business. He was very concerned about traffic and noise. He thought Etiwanda Avenue should be widened because a lot oftraffic will dump onto it. He was not opposed to the appearance and size so long as noise and traffic considerations are addressed. He suggested another entrance onto Highland Avenue. He stated he had spoken to others who are aware of the bells as they exist and are opposed to the bells in their residential neighborhood because they feel they are intrusive. He said it is not a bell to call people to mass, but rather a bell that rings from morning into the night. He observed that the bells are not a problem in the church's present location but noted that the bells are easily heard when standing in front of Price Club even with the ambient traffic noise. He felt people had moved to the neighborhood because it is a quiet area and the bells would be out of context. He did not object to using the bells to call people to mass and said his biggest problem is early morning and late evening. He acknowledged that the church members have every right to express '[.heir religion, but felt it unfair to have religious bells continually thrust upon him. Kristen Westfall, 6656 Brownstone Place, Rancho Cucamonga, indicated she lives just south of East Avenue, approximately three block down Highland and one block down East Avenue. She stated she moved to the area for peace and quiet and serenity. She felt that most people understand that · a church is to provide a community and safe haven for parish members. She felt bells are not a nuisance and they are not unreasonable but rather the practice of religion in a symbolic manner. Gina Johnson. 7895 Ocean Court, Fontann, stated she had contacted the Rutherford Foundation, and was told that nuisance is subjected by law to the reasonable person standard. She did not feel church bells are unreasonable. She thought that it would be against the First Amendment for the City to prohibit the bells because she felt the bells are a pad of the church ministry because it is customary for Catholic churches to ring bells. Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 24, 1996 Don DLugos, 12902 Cherokee Road, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concern about the land use around the church and questioned if property will be salable for residential use once the church is built. He suggested a traffic signal by the church exit because the street will be congested. He felt seven minutes of music is too long. He thought bells for church only would be acceptable, but they should not be pealed at 6:00 a.m. He suggested a buzzer be used for the school rather than the bells. He noted that Father Gaglia had said the tradition of the bells go back hundreds of years to call in the farmers from the field, and said the farmers did not have watches. He thought the bells are not needed any more. He suggested the church expand in its present location. He felt the City will lose out because builders will not construct houses in the area. David Burger, Senior, 7422 LariaI Place, #A, Rancho Cucamonga, felt a community should not be built without a church in it. Sean Judson, 6346 Choctaw, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he is employed by the Etiwanda School District. He felt the work of the Planning Commission is impodant to the aesthetic appeal and overall quality that makes Rancho Cucamonga desirable place. He welcomed Sacred Head Church to his neighborhood and indicated he thinks churches are the center of the community. He stated he hears the Etiwanda School band practicing and bells from Summit Intermediate School, but they are tangible, audible symbols of a community that focuses on children and family. Christine Roski, 6990 Goldenrain Way, Rancho Cucamonga, stated bells are not a nuisance and they are a church, not a business. She said she hears the bells of Windrows School welcoming the children. She felt the City has unfairly added architectural demands on the church and it is ............ U~re~onable tO'prohibit the bells. She thought bells are pad of countryside, rural churches and are a comfoding sound and a reminder to give thanks to the Lord. Gweyn Frost. 12996 Victoria, Rancho Cucamonga, noted that when other churches were constructed, there were discussions about traffic, but there have not been any problems. She said she can hear bells from a school located approximately a mile away, but she has become used to them and they are not really noticed. Michael Magallis, address unknown. stated he moved to the area padtally to be near a church. He said St. Peter & St. Paul has bells and is in the middle of a residential area. He requested approval of the be[is and thought that people get used to the sound of bells. He commented that four housing tracts are being built in the area which will bring a lot of noise and traffic and those people will be looking for a church. He said that three other churches on Etiwanda Avenue have bells. COmmissioner McNiel questioned if bells are used at St. Peter & St. Paul and if they are the same decibel level and dng the same number of times for the same length of time that the bells at Sacred Head will ring. Father Gaglia responded that St. Peter & St. Paul has the bells but he did not know the decibel level. He stated they probably have different tunes because they have different tapes. He thought the equipment is the same for both churches. Commissioner Lumpp asked what type of tunes are played. Father Gaglia replied they are classical religious hymns. Mada Diaz, 6242 Colony Coud, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she lives four houses from the proposed church and is a padsh member. She said none of her neighbors have complained to her about the bells and she is looking forward to hearing them. Planning Commission Minutes .l~-lr~ January 24, 1996 Ross Jarrette, 12974 Summit Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, said he live four houses from the church He felt bells are serene. He thought there will be an increase in traffic just because the community is growing. Floemz Munoz. address unknown, stated he was bom in Mexico 57 years ago. He said farmers had no watches and knew it was time to go to church when the bells rang. He stated the City is growing and needs more churches and bells. He felt those near the church would be blessed. Michele Viscone, address unknown, felt the sound of fireworks at Quakes Stadium is obstructive but said she had not heard anyone complain about them. She thought church bells are a lot less intrusive than the fireworks. Frank Landa, 6244 Etiwanda Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, indicated he lives adjacent to the church at the nodheast corner. He stated he did not know the bells were an issue and did not care about them except he was not happy that they will ring every 15 minutes. He felt the bells should be allowed, but not every 15 minutes. He thought someone from the church should have contacted the neighbors and the church proposal has gotten out of hand. He feared he will lose his privacy. He questioned where block walls will be constructed and asked that one be built adjacent to his properly. Gilbed Cor[ez, 6645 Brownstone Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, hoped there would be no discrimination against the church. He felt the church will be an asset to the community. Hearing no furt~r cOmments, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. He observed there were two issues, the bells and the waft. Commissioner Melcher felt the peal of church bells for any denomination is pad of the American scene. He thought the bells are part of the church, whether it is a small or large church in the country or a big church in an urban environment. He felt the bells should be permitted and be pealed as often and as long as the church desires. He noted that the Design Review Committee had disagreed about the height of the bell tower and noted that he favored the lowest possible height for the bell lower. He preferred that the bell tower be eliminated because he felt it is not an asset to the architecture. Commissioner Lumpp observed that it is okay for roosters to crow and dogs to bark and he thought it should also be okay for a church to ring its bells. He recognized why staff had suggested the condition, but he disagreed and he felt the church should have the bells as they are currently used in their current facility. He noted that the tradition of bells goes back way before the bidh of America. Commissioner McNiel stated this is a very urban church in what will be a very suburban community. He noted that when the City adopted the various specific plans, provisions were made specifically to allow churches in residential neighborhoods. He agreed that it belongs there. He felt that in terms of decibel levels, there are things that are appropriate and things which may no longer be appropriate. He noted there was a time when church bells performed a very functional element, whereas they are now only a symbolic element. He said the bells no longer call people to church because people travel many miles to go to their favorite churches. He felt the bells are an inlrusion at cedain times of the day into people's lives who are not associated with this particular church but live nearby. He suggested finding out what is being done at St. Peter & St. Paul to see if they have a limited amount of bells or a muted bell. He stated the Planning Commission has a responsibility to not only the church members, but to other community members as well. He observed that there was a time when some communities revolved completely around the church, but he noted that is no longer the case. Chairman Barker stated that when he lived in a small community, the church bells were a pad of life .but he did not recall hearing them every hour. He did not remember hearing bells when living in a Planning Commission Minutes ~11- January 24, 1996 large city except when attending church because of the traffic noise. He observed that the church is moving into a neighborhood and changing the status quo and asserting it has the right to it and the citizens will get used to it. He said he lives near St. Peter & St. Paul and he did not think they play tunes or bells every 15 minutes. He said he was uncomfortable with a new neighbor coming into an area and indicating they will play seven minutes of tunes. He did not feel it is a First Amendment issue, but rather a new neighbor coming into a neighborhood and changing the pattern. He did not oppose bells in the morning nor did he oppose using bells for the school. He was concerned about whether the current pattern is intrusive. He was surprised that someone would state that what is appropriate on a major thoroughfare in a commercial area may be appropriate to bring into what at the moment is a rural, lower density area. He observed that hundreds of people attended meetings when the Etiwanda Specific Plan was being developed and the residents wanted to maintain the area as rural as possible. He thought bells are rural, but he did not feel long playing songs are rural. He did not support elimination of the bells but he felt there should be room for recognition of the impact the bells will have on the area and residents. He noted that churches are generally good at finding ways to work things out and he hoped things could be worked out with the community. He commented that school bells are functional and not continuous. It was the consensus of the Commission that school bells were acceptable. Chairman Barker asked if Father Gaglia had any response to the concerns he had raised. Father Gaglia stated the church is an important part of the already existing neighborhood because ............. 31_ p~rFe.nt of th~ people who live in the Etiwanda Specific Plan area are members of Sacred Heart Church. He stated the bells ring mostly during the day when most people are at work. He observed that when Sacred Heart Church was first built at its present location, it was a rural, grape growing area. not a commercial area. He noted they have had a sign up for 10 years in the new location indicating that they would be moving there. He reiterated that the seven-minute hymn sessions are at 9:00 a.m., 12:00 noon, and 5:00 p.m. He suggested they would be wilting to cut down from four hymns to two hymns in order to reduce the time. Chairman Barker felt that would be a step in the right direction. He noted that one of the residents had indicated he was not overjoyed about the ringing every quarter hour. He felt there should be some negotiating room so far as the songs and materials. He noted that the church is part of the community, but it has not been part of that neighborhood and 69 percent of the residents are not parishioners. He said that once something is there. people know about it when they buy into an area. He was concerned about changing the status quo. Brad Buller, City Planner, felt there was a general majority position by the Commissioners that some level of bells is appropriate. He suggested modifying the condition to read that "The use of bells or other sounds to indicate time of day, time of mass, or school activities may be allowed under separate approval by the Planning Commission, subject to the submittal of a special study identifying the actual proposed use of the bells. He thought that would give an oppodunity to determine if there should be sound limitations, if they should they be subject to the noise ordinance of the municipal code, etc. Chairman Bar~er felt that would allow the City to sit down in a less judicial role and find a satisfactory solution. Commissioner McNiel supported the revised condition because it would give the Commission an opportunity to review it. Commissioners Melcher stated he would prefer just approving the bells, but he was willing to accept the modified condition. Planning Commission Minutes -12- January 24, 1996 Commissioner Lumpp concurred. He asked if there is a wall adjacent to the existing house at the northeast corner of the church site. Mr. Murphy replied there is not, but there is a Eucalyptus windrow. Commissioner Lumpp questioned why a wall is being required along the southeast property line. where there is no adjacent development. Chairman Barker thought it was because of the grade change. Commissioner Lumpp suggested a wall be required to buffer Mr. Landa's residence at the nodheast corner of the properly with the details to be worked out with staff. He thought a wall would be appropriate because of the number of vehicles which will be using the driveway. He did not feel the Commission should require a wall along the southeastern border where it abuts the vacant lot and thought a walt should be required in connection with future development of the residential land. Chairman Barker questioned if Mr. Landa wanted a wall. Mr. Landa nodded his approval that he would tike a wall. Chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. Commissioner Melcher said the exhibit depicts a retaining wall to bring the wall up to the level of the ......... d~ve~ay'atong '{he southeast property line. He asked if there will not be a bank. Mr. Murphy indicated that at the Planning Commission workshop and the Design Review Committee meeting them were discussions regarding providing a slope. He said that Condition No. 3 requires the applicant to make a good faith effod to obtain a slope easement from the adjacent properly owner and to provide a slope if it is granted. He said if the easement is not granted, the applicant is to construct a retaining wall with a decorative finish with the final design to be approved by the City Planner. Commissioner Melcher observed that at the first workshop on the project, he had contended that the site is planned in such a way that it forces things which would not need to be done if a different approach were taken on the plan. He said they were told that the site plan arrangement had been mandated by the diocese. He expressed disappointment that the site plan had not been modified. He felt the site plan should be revised to eliminate the two right-angle turns at the main building of the two long 26-foot wide driveways. He thought the necessity to seek a slope easement from an adjacent properly shows that the site plan is too crowded. He said he had heard a lot of things tonight that he agreed with such as the sentiments. reasoning, ideas of community, location of the church, etc. However, as a design professional and a Planning Commissioner, he felt the wall situation indicates the shortcomings of this padicular plan and he thought it will lead to problems for the church in the future. Chairman Barker asked Commissioner Melcher to comment on extending the wall. Commissioner Melcher did not think the Commission should extend walls on the basis of a request .from an adjoining property owner. He suppoded staffs recommendation so far as the walls. Commissioner McNiel agreed with Commissioner Lumpp that the adjacent existing house on the nodheast corner should be buffered by a wall and landscaped. He thought the wall along the southeast side is sufficient as recommended by staff. Chairman Barker stated that the wall is being constructed if necessary for a specific reason, as a retaining wall. not a decorative item. He agreed with Commissioners Lumpp and McNiel regarding Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 24, 1996 the wall to provide privacy for Mr. Landa's properly. He observed that Commissioner Lumpp preferred that the tower be tall, while Commissioner Melcher wanted the tower to be shor~ or non- existing. Commissioner McNiel felt the tower as presented tonight was acceptable· Chairman Barker agreed with the tower· Motion:. Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions approving Variance 95-04 and Conditional Use Permit 95-16 with modifications to require separate Planning Commission approval of the use of bells following a study and to provide a wall adjacent to the existing residence at the nodheast corner. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: MELCHER ABSENT: NONE - carried Commissioner Melcher observed that his no vote was not against the church or the land use but because he thought the site plan should be improved· Chairman Barker remarked that Commissioner Melcher had been consistent in voicing that opinion regarding the site plan. DIRECTOR'S R'B2ORTS E PLIES A re ~'-~ · - quest tb-~c~.onsider initiation of text changes to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to ad'~'~utomotive Sales and Leases as a conditionally permitted use to parcels adjacent to the 1-15 Freeway in Subarea Brad Buller. City Planner, presented fi~e'~'staff report. '%, % . Commissioner McNiel stated he did not oppose~s. tartlng the process to consider text changes; however, he said he has reservations about auto s~les and their recent tenancies toward freeway adjacent marque signage· "" -\ '%. Chairman Barker agreed that future signage will be an issue· H~'was concerned about access with the property in question· He asked if the applicant was pr s nt. ee Daniel Plies, The Plies Companies, 22706 Aspen Street, Suite 701, Lake Fbrest, stated he owns the property. ~0'n'"~' Chairman Barker asked if he was looking at the surplus Southern California Edis ,~.CE)strip in the area. Mr. Plies responded affirmatively· He said they had previously sold the land to SCE a~d~b~.ey are now negotiating to purchase it back. He indicated they are also in the process of negotia~o aurchase the vacant land to the west· Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 24, 1996