Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/12/10 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting December 10, 2008 Chairman Fletcher called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:08 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart; Ray Wimberly ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Daniel Correa, Assistant Planner; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Associate Planner; James Troyer, Planning Director ANNOUNCEMENTS ' None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0, to approve the minutes of November 12, 2008 with one correction noted on page 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18466-ALBERT A. WEBB ASSOCIATES (for ANTHONY VERNOLA) -A proposal to subdivide a property of 9.56 acres into 43 lots for the purposes of residential development in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (South Overlay and Etiwanda Avenue Overlay) located at the southeast corner of Etiwanda and Miller Avenues; APN: 1100-131-01. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He noted that minor corrections have been made to the Initial Study on pages 8 and 14 in that three boxes were incorrectly checked in the study and that making the changes are within the parameters of CEQA Guidelines. He also noted that on page A-69 of the agenda packet, Engineering Conditions 1.d and 3.e have been revised for clarity. Chairman Fletcher asked for clarification of Exhibit D and on what was being done with Lot 38. Mr. Smith referred to Exhibit D of the staff report. He indicated that because of the proximity to the freeway, concern about the lots closest to the freeway was expressed in the Design Review Committee. He said that originally, the project provided 44 lots and now it is 43 and that Lot 38 is now about four times larger than it needs to be. He said Lot 39 shifted to the east. He said a provision has been made to create a large side yard that the owner will not be able to build upon but will help mitigate for the freeway impacts. Vice Chairman Munoz confirmed that two lots were combined and the project lost one lot. Chairman Fletcher confirmed that this moves the house away from the freeway. Mr. Smith said before, the lot was closer to Etiwanda Avenue and now it has a protected side yard approximately 20 feet wide because they could not put this in the rear yard area. Chairman Fletcher asked if the applicant is present. Mo Faghihi, Albert A. Webb, Assoc, stated he represents the applicant. He thanked Mr. Smith and the DRC for their assistance. He said he has reviewed and agrees to all the conditions of approval. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Howdyshell said she likes the plot plan, that there is good use of open space and that she is glad that the issue with Lot 38 was addressed on the "front end" of the project review rather than the back end. • Commissioner Wimberly concurred and thanked the applicant for working with staff toward the solution for the lots and the setbacks. He said he looks forward to seeing a housing product. Commissioner Stewart commented that the DRC was happy with the proposal and they appreciate the cooperation they received from the applicant. Vice Chairman Munoz echoed the comment and remarked that it is a difficult comer to work with considering the freeway and the overpass. He said the applicant did good work and repositioned the lot and they worked in good faith with the DRC. Chairman Fletcher agreed with his colleagues, but mentioned his concern that when the house product does come in and the development is built that that large yard on Lot 38 may not be properly maintained. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Munoz, to adopt the Resolution of Approval for SUBTT18466 and to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts as presented by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried « « « « « B. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF A PLANNING DIRECTOR DECISION TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00616 - MILLIKEN MARKET (NIDAL SAMAAN) - An appeal of a Planning Director decision to deny an application for a convenience market store with sales of distilled spirits, located on the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street, within the Industrial Park District, Subarea 12, at 9635 Milliken Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes -2- December 10, 2008 Daniel Correa, Assistant Planner, gave the staff report. Chairman Fletcher asked if there are only two liquor licenses within a 2-mile radius. Mr. Correa noted that the ABC does not distinguish between the two types of licenses that are issued. Chairman Fletcher asked if the ABC distinguishes licenses for on-site consumption. Mr. Correa responded that they do make that distinction but that would not relate to this project because this license is for off-site consumption. Commissioner Stewart confirmed that the two closest licenses are 2 miles away and that they are Costco and Sam's Club. Mr. Correa said there are others that sell distilled spirits but that is not a major part of their sales. Commissioner Stewart confirmed that there are two within a 2-mile radius and that the others he is noting are outside of the 2-mile radius. Chairman Fletcher asked if the applicant would like to comment. Mike Rue, Marketplace Partners, 18231 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 201, Tustin, gave a brief history of the project application. He highlighted reasons to approve the project request such as: eleven nearby hotels, nearby apartments, daytime employment of 51,000 within the census tract, no grocery or drug stores in the area, only two vendors of distilled spirits within 2 miles, location/convenience for regular commuters, and there are no schools or churches close by. He said it is a needed convenience as they would sell cold cuts, cheese, perishables, toiletries and dry goods in addition to alcoholic beverages. He said it is one of the busiest intersections of the city. He noted that they had several prospective owners apply and this one is well qualified. He said many of the licenses already issued are in Ontario and are Type 20. He added that the census tract is based upon year 2000 information which is lacking about 13,000 people in its total number. He said the ABC also does not count the 50,000 daytime employed workers in the tract. He noted the State gives the City the right to make the final determination for a PCN. He gave a brief explanation of the meaning of Public Convenience or Necessity. He said he disagrees with the City's findings in the resolution. He said he does not believe this business would increase crime by itself and would provide a needed use and would attract customers to the local hotels. Chairman Fletcher asked if there are lounges in the hotels nearby that offer the sale of alcohol. Mr. Rue said no, they do not have liquor licenses. Commissioner Stewart asked how the dedicated sales area would be divided up. Mr. Rue said about 37%would be for alcohol sales and 63%for other items, primarily food because he is trying to attract people that are staying in the hotels that have kitchen facilities. Commissioner Stewart asked if this owner owns other businesses in Rancho Cucamonga. Mr. Rue said he does; Castle Liquor at 19`h Street and Carnelian and it is a well-run establishment. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -3- December 10, 2008 Holly Russell, 9470 Hyssop Drive, indicated she disapproves of the use and she did not understand why they would need a liquor license for a grocery store. She said she did not think we needed another grocery store so close to the large stores already there (Sam's, Costco). Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Munoz expressed concern about the saturation of alcohol licenses and said he is torn about another license in the southern part of this area and he believes the license may not hurt the commercial area. He said given the economy, he would lean towards granting the application. He said he considered the economy, the number of licenses, the area and the saturation of licenses. He said he would be hard pressed to support a denial. Commissioner Wimberly noted there is a significant number of licenses but it may not be relative to the application before them. He said the current technology for indicating the licenses on the map is deficient in that it does not distinguish between the types of active licenses within the census tract. He said he hopes for better technology because the way it is presented now could limit someone putting in an application. He commented that he would prefer that the resulting tax dollars from the business come to Rancho rather than the City of Ontario. Commissioner Howdyshell said she could see why a mini-mart would be important to have close to hotels for forgotten items/toiletries, snacks. She said the saturation element was well researched and it was good information and gave a clear picture of the conditions. She said how we currently define PCN could change and the economics are changing daily. She said she is concerned about public safety and that the responding officers have to answer the calls and she appreciated the letter from the police department. She said the business would be a service to many in the area and is a good business opportunity. Commissioner Stewart said this business has a target market at this location and that these are busy streets and she applauds Commissioner Wimberly regarding his comment about the tax dollars going to Ontario instead of staying in Rancho Cucamonga. She said this business could affect the economy of the center and in today's marketplace we should encourage businesses to come, provide jobs and services to people. She said she might see it differently at another location, but this market is huge and they will draw from the hotels. She said she highly respects law enforcement and has many years experience in this regard, but she does not agree with their conclusion that this business would generate a problem. She said she believes the problems would more than likely arise from the hotels and Type 20 licenses. She said the market mix sounds fairly good, the apartments may or may not frequent this use because they would have to cross the street, but the store could succeed there and she does not believe it would be a public safety issue. Chairman Fletcher appreciated all the comments. He said the main issue is the liquor sales and the concentration of the liquor licenses. He said they have to look at the type of use -there are only 2 others of this type within 2 miles and he does not believe it is too high of a concentration there. He said most of the commercial area is south of Rancho in Ontario. He said we need the tax dollars in Rancho, and that the City has worked hard to get upscale development and a feeling of"arrival" at this main intersection as you come into Rancho. He said since the last census was taken, there are now thousands of apartments and hotel rooms along Milliken and that he does not believe this use would be detrimental to any of these. His said it will be a convenience to the residents and nearby hotels. He noted that people are unlikely to go to Costco or Sam's, look for parking and wait in line for convenience items. He said he supports the request. James Troyer, Planning Director, suggested that if the Commission is in agreement to support approval of the application, that they continue the hearing to the January 14, 2009 meeting in order to bring a draft resolution of approval for their consideration and action that would include the conditions for the business operation. Planning Commission Minutes -4- December 10, 2008 Vice Chairman Munoz suggested that the public hearing would remain open and the item be continued to the January 14, 2009 meeting for the purpose of bringing back an appropriate resolution for action. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to continue the public hearing for DRC2008-00616 to the January 14, 2009 meeting. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried • C. A 90 -DAY REVIEW OF THE BUSINESS OPERATION RELATED TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00283 - EL LOCO CANTINA (FORMERLY FELIPE'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT)-A public hearing to examine the business operation to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval and in a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity. The subject restaurant is located in the Masi Plaza commercial center at 11815 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 0229-011-38 D. A 90-DAY REVIEW OF ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT DRC2007-00284 - EL LOCO CANTINA (FORMERLY FELIPE'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT) -A public hearing to examine the business operation to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with the conditions of approval and in a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity. The subject restaurant is located in the Masi Plaza commercial center at 11815 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 0229-011-38 Daniel Correa, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He noted staffs request for five added conditions shown on page C & D-3 of the agenda packet. Bruce Evans, legal counsel for the applicants, stated they are opposed to conditions 4 and 5 because #4, in their opinion, is a prudent business practice (preventing the admission of unaccompanied minors after 9pm and when there is live entertainment) and #5 requiring a 50/50 ratio of food/alcohol sales. He presented a graphic depicting data and stated that Loco Cantina does not have a police-call problem, and of 20 restaurants, none had less than Loco Cantina and some had significantly more. He said he offered a compromise condition to staff that stipulates minors could gain entrance if accompanied by an adult/parent. He said the information presented is not law but only a guide from the ABC and that the staff report is incorrect. He said there is nothing in the law(is only a guide)that requires a type 47 business to require the admission of minors. He said the 50/50 condition is inappropriate in that it crosses the line of land use regulation and alcohol regulation. He said a restaurant is not even required to serve food at all times but they do(as noted in their CUP conditions). He said the kitchen is open at all times and serves food at all times. He said the business is open for lunch and has an extensive menu. He said no calls for service have been noted since June. He said this business generates 1 million dollars in taxable sales per year and provides 22 jobs, they are not a nuisance and that they are in total compliance with their CUP and Entertainment Permit. Commissioner Howdyshell asked how many restaurants in town do not allow minors after 9:00 pm. She expressed concern that they are excluding minors from their business. Mr. Evans said he did not know but said that Buffalo Wild Wings and the Yard House do on the weekends and during later hours other nights. He said there may be others. He said Rancho is the first city he has dealt with that has an issue with this practice. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -5- December 10, 2008 Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, commented that there are two main issues;the 50/50 food to alcohol sales and the exclusion of minors. He remarked that he too has had conversations with the ABC. He said it is correct that ABC does not require allowing minors but they support the City's discretion to impose such conditions. He noted that the 50/50 condition is consistent with the ABC and does not conflict with State law. James Troyer, Planning Director, commented there is no real means to enforce the 50/50 condition as the City would not audit their receipts. Chairman Fletcher asked if these conditions are applied to any other restaurants in town. Mr. Troyer said that he is not aware of any. Chairman Fletcher asked if they saw problems arise, could the CUP be brought back and have conditions added. Mr. Troyer said yes, it can be brought back at any time. Commissioner Wimberly commented that considering the history of the business he recommends a 90 day review. Commissioner Howdyshell also noted the history of the restaurant and that she wants to see the restaurant flourish but she struggles with the exclusion of kids looking for a place to go after a football game. She said she has a concern about young people under the age of 21 being admitted, that it could change the flavor of the establishment. Commissioner Stewart asked for clarification regarding the admission of minors and what specifically is the applicant looking for. Mr. Evans said currently they are not allowed to check identification at the door or on the premises. He said the condition is poorly written. He said they do not want to exclude minors. He said they do not want them when there is live entertainment and after 9pm during those times because of the liquor liability. He said they would like flexibility with this. He said if a minor consumes alcohol and leaves, the business is liable. He said police calls late in the evening often involve minors. He said if they are accompanied by a parent, they can come in. He said he believes the law gives them this flexibility and that this may not be the best place for them after 9pm if there is live entertainment and they are without a parent. He said there are all kinds of conditions that ensure the business operates as a bona fide restaurant. He said Condition #2 is poorly written. Mr. Troyer asked the applicant why he believes#2 is poorly written. He asked if a person is an adult and he goes to a restaurant, and he is not ordering alcohol, should they be carded. Mr. Evans said he interprets the condition to mean that you can never check the identification of a minor. He asked when then would you check their I.D. Mr. Troyer said it means they can check identification when they order alcohol, that at most restaurants with a Type 47 license, no one is carded until they order alcohol. Mr. Evans said they will check I.D.'s at the door or inside and it is because of this practice that they have no citations with the ABC and the condition is meddlesome. He said this condition has nothing to do with ensuring Loco Cantina remains a bona fide restaurant. He said no other CUP in town has this. He noted he disagrees with the City attorney. Commissioner Stewart confirmed that Conditions 4 and 5 are the concern. Planning Commission Minutes -6- December 10, 2008 Mr. Evans stated that is correct and that the other conditions already in place go above and beyond what is typical. He reiterated that he believes 4 and 5 are in conflict with State law and unduly burdensome to the business. Chairman Fletcher commented that the Commission wishes to prevent the occurrence of a public nuisance. He pointed out that Mr. Evans' clients(the applicants) previously came to the Commission under false pretenses and asked for extended hours and entertainment and approval for a dance floor and then sold the business and started operating as something totally different. He said staff wants to see this remain a restaurant but it appears the owners want to migrate towards being a bar and that there is no doubt in his mind that this is what is occurring. He said he went to the grand opening and although in compliance, the operation is operating on the borderline as a bar. He said opting to keep the kids out in the night time is with the idea of operating a bar. He emphasized that this is not what the CUP intends. He said when you enter the establishment the bar is the main focus and the bar structure is most prominent. He said it sounds to him as if the owners want to operate as a bar. Mr. Evans responded and said there it is not bar, that the Loco Cantina is doing what that were substantially doing before the CUP was brought up for modification and if that were the case, they would not open at 11 am. or Sundays for breakfast. Chairman Fletcher said with other establishments there is some separation between the eating place and the lounge but that is not the case here. He said if you want to operate a restaurant during the day and a bar at night, and that will cause a problem for the City. He said he has seen others do it and it is a problem. He said it is not true to say that opening at 11 am means they are not operating a bar. He said this is the easy way to operate as a bar; open a restaurant first and then move in this direction. Mr. Evans said the business is a legal operation and in compliance with State law, the CUP and the EP. He said he disputes the prior violations and stated the business does not have a law enforcement problem and is not a nuisance. He said it is a restaurant and has more conditions and entertainment exactly as shown in the Entertainment Permit. He said they made a mistake with the space allotted for entertainment and the tables and they promptly removed the outside speakers. lie said he disagrees with the two proposed conditions. He said all the conditions in place will ensure your operating policies continue. He said to scrutinize this business alone in these economic times is not fair and selective. Chairman Fletcher called for a recess at 8:39 pm to release the high school students and reconvened the meeting at 8:43 pm. All Commissioners were present. Mr. Evans noted that Peppers, McAlan's, Yardhouse, Twins, and Omaha Jack's also ask for I.D.'s to prevent the entrance of minors. Felipe de la Piedra stated he is one of the owners. He said they are open 7 days a week and he is present almost every day. He said they have two kitchens, they promote their food and menu and they just had a grand opening. He said the competition is very tough. He said staff made a number of visits to check the restaurant. Commissioner Stewart remarked that this is a 90-day review and there were some issues with their business operation. She said staff visited them and the business has made an effort to be compliant. She said she does not disagree with the idea of modifying the condition regarding minors admittance as suggested by the attorney. She said it would not be unreasonable to allow minors with their parents. She said she is OK with condition#5 but suggested they strike the last sentence. She said she is not opposed to a 6 month review period and suggested the applicant work with staff for a revised condition. She said because it is a CUP, it can be brought back at any time for review. Planning Commission Minutes -7- December 10, 2008 She said the business understands and they are willing to be compliant. She said this is a tough economy, and we do not want to have a problem business, but it needs to be considered. Vice Chairman Munoz agreed with Commissioner Stewart. He commended the work of the owners and staff and it looks like fixing the problem has been successful. He said he has some trouble with condition#5 as it is not enforceable. He said the big issue was the 23 police calls previously cited, that is what brought them here in the first place, but it appears that is resolved. He commented that other businesses impose conditions such as condition#4 in order to separate potential issues with minors and adults imbibing alcohol. He said he feels minors should have opportunities but also need limits and this is hard to separate. He said he agrees with Commissioner Stewart, that the owners should work with staff on this condition, that when there is entertainment, minors should be requested to show identification but that this in no way is a sign that the Commission is relaxing on this operation being run the way it should be. He said they need to be responsible with entertainment and that they do not want the problems that they had earlier in the year. He said if the last sentence of condition#5 is removed, it becomes benign. He said overall this is good work and good progress and he is encouraged that they continue in this. He said minors and alcohol at midnight is a recipe for disaster as it becomes a game for them. He suggested they strike the last sentence of condition#5 and bring back the business operation for another review in 6 months. Commissioner Howdyshell concurred. She noted it has been a long process, the business is trying to get back on track and it is hard to see restaurants struggle. She added that condition#4 needs clarification and she is OK with modifying#5 on the last sentence. She said they need to support the restaurants. She added that she is in favor of a 6-month review period. Commissioner Wimberly concurred that#4 needs to be more specific about the control of minors. He supported striking the last sentence of#5. Chairman Fletcher said that he is just setting the tone. He said he wants to see their success but he does not want them to gravitate towards being a bar and that it is now a borderline bar operation. He said he employed the"wife test"and brought her to the grand opening and she too indicated it felt more like a bar than a restaurant. He said he would like to see it become famous for their food and he does not want the entertainment at night to be the major focus. He said the key factor will be the calls for service. He said at their previous hearing, there was testimony of public vomiting in the parking lot and a stabbing and that is a major concern for a business just getting started. He noted there is a karate business next door that caters to youth and that he does not want to see conflict with the neighboring businesses. He said if conditions #4 and #5 are amended, it could be a problem for condition #2, but perhaps they could check I.D. inside the building. He reiterated that this is supposed to be a restaurant and not a nightclub but that the business needs some flexibility. He said it appears the majority of the Commission would agree to modifying the conditions. Mr. Troyer noted that it appears the Commission is directing another review in 6 months and to modify the conditions. He suggested the item be continued to the first meeting in January so the wording of the conditions could be worked out and bring back a resolution to that effect. Vice Chairman Munoz said if they wait until January, that it would not consider the holidays and their entertainment offered during that time. Chairman Fletcher reopened the hearing. Mr. Evans said it would be costly for them to come back. Mr. Flower noted the business is not being shut down and they are currently in operation. He referred to the conditions noted in the resolution of approval (Agenda packet pages C & D 78) and restated that they could change the wording of#10 to indicate no cover charge;#11 is satisfactory as is;#12 would be changed to read, "The business during business hours must allow entry and povide Planning Commission Minutes -8- December 10, 2008 restaurant services to all persons, including persons under the age of 21 years, however, the business may deny entry to persons under 21 years of age after 9:00 p.m. when live entertainment is offered, and only if the minor is not accompanied by a parent or legal guardian. There shall be no identification checks of patrons at the entrance or upon entering the establishment except during such times when minors may be excluded from the business in accordance with this condition";and on #13 the last sentence would be struck. (note for the record: Mr. Flower referred to the same conditions noted in the earlier discussion, however, the Commissioners read the conditions as noted in the staff report, and Mr. Flower read the same conditions from the resolution,thus the difference in the numbers of the conditions referred to during the discussion.) Chairman Fletcher asked if the existing conditions for the restaurant restrict serving alcohol outside at certain times. Mr. Troyer said no. He said they cannot restrict the outside service of alcohol in their approved outside eating area. He said they did require that the outside speakers be removed. Mr. Flower asked if there is outside access to the dining patio. Mr. Troyer said there is a small gate. Chairman Fletcher commented that the owner will have to police that. He said he wants to see them successful with the best food and he does not want to see night time problems or see the business "morph" in the future. He asked the applicants if that is clearly understood. The applicants indicated from their seats that they clearly received that message and were in agreement. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, to adopt the Resolution of Approval 08-69 for DRC2007-00283 with the modified condition #s 10, 12, and 13. The Commission directed that the business operation be reviewed again in 6 months. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS D. B. Christenson commented that this business operation did a"bait and switch' in that they sold a restaurant and then became a nightclub. He applauded staff for their followup on the issue. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ja s R. Troyer, AICP Secretary Approved: January 14, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes -9- December 10, 2008