No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/01/23 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 23, 2002 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart ABSENT: Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman; Principal Planner, Kirt Coury, Associate Planner; Ralph Crane, Fire Marshal; Linda Daniels, RDA Director; Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Catherine Johnson, Associate Planner; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner; Debra Meier, Contract Planner; Jan Reynolds, RDA Analyst;Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary; Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer; Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated there were some documents in front of the Commissioners regarding several items. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, carried 4-0-1 (Tolstoy absent), to approve the minutes of January 9, 2002. CONSENT CALENDAR A. VACATION V-183-SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-A request to vacate excess street right-of-way at the southwest side of the knuckle intersection of Malvem Avenue and Salina Street - APN: 209-04147. Related File: Development Review 00-61. B. VACATION V-183-SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-A request to vacate excess street right-of-way at the southwest side of the knuckle intersection of Malvem Avenue and Salina Street - APN: 209-041-47. Related File: Development Review 00-61. C. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00516 — US HOMES — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for three previously approved tentative tract maps consisting of 113 single-family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acres) of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan in the Rancho Etiwanda Planned Development, located on the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street and approximately 300 feet north of the northwest comer of Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street. APN: 225-10144. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14523-1, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14494, and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15902. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff was requesting that Item B be pulled from the Consent Calendar. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, to adopt Items A and C of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00675 Debra Meier, Contract Planner, presented the staff report and indicated staff was suggesting three minor revisions to the resolution to increase the wall height to 8 feet along the project perimeter and to clarify the conditions regarding the wall along the south boundary and the security lighting. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Joe Carroll, Copart, Inc., 2176 The Alameda, San Jose, concurred with the changes. He stated he has the opportunity to fly around the country and he felt it had been a real pleasure to work with Rancho Cucamonga, particularly Ms. Meier. There were no additional public comments. Chairman McNiel stated the developer had been very cooperative. He supported the project. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Macias,to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Development Review DRC2001-00675 with modifications suggested by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16257-FORECAST CORPORATION - A request to subdivide 26.7 acres of land into one lot for condominium purposes in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Etiwanda South Overlay District, and Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard -APN: 227-211-02, 04, 05, 09, 10, 15, 17, 20, and 29. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00557 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2001-00567. Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 23, 2002 E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2001-00557 - FORECAST CORPORATION-A request to construct 368 apartments on 26.7 acres of land in the Medium Residential District(8-14 dwelling units per acre), Etiwanda South Overlay District, and Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard-APN: 227-211-02, 04, 05, 09, 10, 15, 17, 20, and 29. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16257 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2001-00567. Kid Coury,Associate Planner, presented the staff report and indicated a new site utilization map,site map, conceptual grading plan, and landscape plan were placed in front of the Commissioners. Chairman McNiel asked if staff had met with the surrounding residents with respect to the issues brought forth. Mr. Coury responded affirmatively. He said he met with several at the Planning counter, spoke with them on the telephone, and met with them at the neighborhood meeting. Chairman McNiel asked how many attended the neighborhood meeting. Mr. Coury replied approximately 10 residents attended the first meeting on November20, 2001, and approximately 12 attended the meeting on January 17, 2002. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jimmy Previti, Forecast Homes, 10670 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,stated they read the staff report and were willing to accept all conditions. Chairman McNiel noted Mr. Previty met with the neighbors and asked if they were working to resolution on the issues raised by the neighbors. Mr. Previti felt they were. Brad Buller, City Planner, noted that several issues were raised at the neighborhood meeting including one issue regarding fire safety. He reported that fire staff met with homeowners on the property earlier in the day and a representative of the Fire District was available to respond. He said staff had tried to be available and had encouraged them to question such things as sewer locations and capacities or direction on whether a new system might have to be built if the residents wish to develop their properties in the future. He indicated staff suggested the residents work directly with Cucamonga County Water District. He said that one of the questions asked by the residents concerned the street improvements being done and what the drive access will be like when the street improvements are done and when the proposed project is done. Dan Guerra, Dan Guerra and Associates, 10271 B Trademark Street, Rancho Cucamonga,observed that at the neighborhood meeting, residents asked questions relative to the improvements currently being constructed on Etiwanda Avenue by another development project. He said that project is across the street and his firm happens to be the consultants on that project as well. He said they had not specifically answered those questions at the neighborhood meeting, but it was indicated that the plans are available at City Hall. He stated that Etiwanda Avenue is currently being widened and the Etiwanda frontage across the current residents' properties is not being widened at the present time. He said the existing rock and rubble curb is being replaced with an asphalt berm in the same location and asphalt driveways are being installed onto the existing access driveways on the west side of Etiwanda Avenue, including Chervil Street to improve the situation. Mr. Buller pointed out that the residents questioned the southerly drive access location on Etiwanda Avenue. He said the residents wondered if the access could or should be moved. He reported that Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 23, 2002 the Design Review Committee was aware that this driveway access was aligned with the apartment project across the street. He said staff again looked at the access, and believes that it is better to have the driveways aligned than to have them offset. Mr. Coury noted that the wall along the northwest property line would be a minimum of 8 feet and a maximum of 10 feet including a 2-foot retaining wall. He said there may be a maximum of 14-foot high walls in some areas with an 8-foot exposed wall and a 6-foot retaining wall because of the grade difference. He stated that at the first neighborhood meeting two property owners indicated they did not want an 8-foot wall and the developer indicated a willingness to use wrought iron fencing. He commented the neighbors accepted that solution at the first neighborhood meeting; however, they indicated at the January 17 meeting they may prefer the block wall. Don Glover, 7954 Etiwanda Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owns the lot south of Chervil Street with two houses and has lived there for 23 years and his family owned the property for over 100 years. He said he received a flyer for a neighborhood meeting and was told they would be building apartments adjacent to his lot. He agreed the apartments are beautiful but said he will be driving through an apartment complex to get to his driveway. He did not feel that was right. He felt he would be landlocked if the project were approved and his property would not be of value to anyone except Forecast. He said he would have walls completely surrounding him. He commented that he was told prior to the latest neighborhood meeting that the 2-1/2 acre parcel would not be developed and he had assumed that meant the entry would be moved. He said he has records to show there is an easement that was dedicated in 1921 and rededicated in 1964 for ingress and egress to his property and his neighbor's property. He stated that 10 cars currently use that easement and he objected to now having to share that road with 346 apartment dwellers. He felt that traffic is definitely impacted. He said that there will be a great visual impact as the area is currently open fields. He commented that it is now quiet except for noise from the freeway, which puts him to sleep. He asked that the developer stub out infrastructure utilities (gas, water, etc.) so his land will be worth something. He said they were told at the neighborhood meeting that water and sewer would be stubbed in. He stated he asked about electric, gas, cable, and telephone and the developer responded they would not stub out for those. He acknowledged that the developer was trying to work with the residents but felt that the situation was benefiting Forecast Homes and not his lifestyle. He said that the developer has asked to move his (Mr. Glover's) 20-foot easement to Chervil Street and said the developer had suggested giving him property along his easterly property line, but he would then have to do a u-tum to get into his garage. He thought the project would then have to go back through Design Review. He asked if Chervil Street would then become a public street. He inquired if the developer would be required to bring in all utilities. He commented that the 21/2-acre parcel will eventually be built when the zoning is changed from Low Medium to Medium. Mr. Glover said his way of life is being affected. He requested the project be denied. Juanita Sandoval, 12820 Chervil Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she lives in the house at the west end of Chervil Street and will be surrounded on two sides by the proposed apartment development. She objected to the apartments because it will interfere with her mountain view, afternoon breezes, privacy, and lack of traffic. She said migratory birds visit the mature trees surrounding her property. She believed there had been no environmental specialist to determine if the development will adversely impact the survival of the birds. She asked if the birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Act and asked if the California Fish and Game and United States Fish and Wildlife Service had reviewed and approved the environmental documents. She objected to the loss of her rural atmosphere. She noted an 8-foot block wall is proposed to be located approximately 5 feet from her home. She said she lives in a single-story house and a two-story apartment building is proposed to be located approximately 30 feet from her property line and the apartments will be at a higher elevation. She objected to the apartments having windows that would have a view into her backyard and bedroom windows. She acknowledged that the developer has indicated he will provide landscaping to provide privacy and she asked that they be required to do so. She was also concerned that there will be a sidewalk adjacent to the wall that borders his backyard. She felt that would encourage graffiti and vandalism to the wall and grant easy access to climbing over the wall. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 23, 2002 She preferred that the sidewalk be removed and landscaping such as thorny vines be planted to grow on the wall to deter wall climbing. She expressed concerns about the safety of her children. She said that Chervil Street is a private dirt road that varies from 15 feet to 25 feet wide and has little traffic. She stated the proposed block wall will abruptly dead-end Chervil Street on the west end. She reported that trash trucks currently use the dirt road to turn around safely rather than backing down the road. She said she currently has an alternate escape route but the proposed development will block off that exit. She felt that large vehicles such as trash trucks will be forced to back up the entire length of the dirt road. She said she contacted Burtec and was told they did not have an official comment but the route supervisor feared they may not be able to staff their trucks with only one person if they have to back up onto Etiwanda Avenue. She said that pedestrians and bicyclists use the dirt road as well and they would be endangered if the trash trucks back out. She was concerned that the dirt road they have been able to use for the last 6 years would no longer be available as an alternate escape route in case of fire or earthquake. She said that at the January 17 neighborhood meeting, they asked the developer to grant an access easement to allow trucks to safely turnaround and he responded it was not his responsibility to give up any of his land. She felt they may have a prescriptive easement and asked that the City make the developer grant access to the property for a cul-de-sac to remain in its pre-existing location. She felt that would solve many safety and traffic concerns. She was appalled the City would allow a zoning change to support apartment units adjacent to land where only single-family homes exist. She felt her investment in her home will be lost once the apartments are built. She thought single-family homes or single story condominiums should be built. She asked that the project not be approved until the developer addresses the problems created with respect to privacy, safety, and the investments of the existing homeowners. Daniel Sandoval, 12820 Chervil Street, presented a list of requested conditions including: 1) require developer to bring in water mains to support the City code for minimum fire hydrant spacing for residential districts, 2) allow existing cul-de-sac to remain at the west end of Chervil Street through prescriptive easement rights, 3)require developer to grant sewer access at each existing property or at the west end of Chervil Street to the proposed maximum density of 14 units per acre to avoid more costly installation in the future, 4) require developer to grant land along the southeastern portion of Chervil Street and to pave and widen Chervil Street to 26 feet, 5) remove sidewalk bordering the wall along his property line,6) require trash disposal dumpsters be located away from his property to avoid odor or debris from going onto his property, 7) require locations and coverings of lights to prevent visible glare and lighting from affecting his property, and 8) require sufficient landscaping to provide privacy screening and prevent graffiti and vandalism and discourage people from climbing the wall. He thought the Etiwanda Specific Plan requires logical phasing of facilities such as sewers and water in order to minimize the cost of service to an area. He said that Cucamonga County Water District felt it would be logical to require the developer to provide access points for sewer and water access for fire hydrants to the adjacent properties to avoid possibly having to install a pumping station at a later time. He showed some pictures of the current dirt road turn-around and the proposed location of the wall. He thought the road does not currently conform to the 14 foot 6 inch height access for emergency access and noted the road is only 15 feet wide in some areas. Joe Rusling, 12839 Chervil Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the staff report indicates he has access to Chervil Street and that resolves some of the issues. He did not think Chervil Street is a street, but is instead his neighbor's driveway and he did not feel he or Mr. Glover have any legal right to use it. He said he does not currently use Chervil Street because he uses the easement that has been in place since 1921. He observed that the City has never developed Chervil Street as a street. He noted that many of the issues raised by residents were considered resolved by the deletion of the 2%-acre parcel from this development. He felt that was irrelevant because the parcel will be developed as soon as the zoning is changed. Wesley La Nier, 12830 Chervil Street, stated he would like to second everything that his neighbors said. He noted that reports showed there should be no problems with flooding. He said Chervil Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 23, 2002 Street has a 10-foot rise near Etiwanda Avenue and then drops back down. He feared that debris would be carried down and back up at the wall at the west end of Chervil, clogging up the drainage and cause flooding. He indicated that his house closed escrow the day before his first meeting with Forecast and the escrow papers stated his house was in a Low Medium area. He felt changing the zoning to Medium will result in an increase in crime. He stated he was concemed about the change to his way of life. He said that pairs of Red Tail Hawks and Kestrel Hawks use the area for feeding. He stated the United States Postal Service moved their mailboxes to a tumout that is about 75 feet off Etiwanda Avenue because of the current widening of Etiwanda Avenue. He said the mail boxes did not indicate where the mailboxes will ultimately be located, but said they would not be placed back on Etiwanda Avenue because of traffic issues. He felt their property values would decrease or stagnate. He submitted a letter signed by four homeowners requesting that the project be referred back for further evaluation. It asked that the developer be required to dedicate land to allow the widening of Chervil Street and allow the City to provide utility services. The letter also stated their belief that the environmental review of the process was not adequate and asked that the project not be approved until such time as public meetings are held to discuss whether apartments are appropriate of if the project should be a condominium development. They also asked for further environmental review and consideration of conditions of approval to protect the current residents' way of life or protect their development potential. He said it is currently a nice, quiet place to live and that children play in the street and that will no longer be possible. Tracy Glover, 7954 Etiwanda Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the utilities for her property and the Rusling property are undergrounded where the proposed driveway will be located. She said that if they have a water or gas leak, they did not know how they would get to the pipes. She noted their water meters are currently on Etiwanda Avenue on Forecast's property and she questioned where they would be moved. She did not like the prospect of having to drive through an apartment complex to reach her home and felt it would interfere with her ability to sell her home. She said they would be virtually landlocked; particularly once the 21-acre parcel is developed. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Chairman McNiel asked staff to respond to some of the comments raised. Mr. Buller reported that there was no zone change before the Commission tonight. He said the property has had the current zoning of Medium and Low Medium for quite some time and the single- family homes have always had the multi-family zoning surrounding them since the adoption of the Etiwanda Specific Plan in the early 1980s. He stated there had been a neighborhood meeting in an attempt to address some of the issues raised by the neighbors and the applicant has indicated a willingness to address some of the issues. He observed that some of the issues raised this evening were new requests, such as the removal of the sidewalk along the Sandoval property. He said staff could handle the site design issues such as the intense landscaping request, relocation of the sidewalk and trash receptacles, etc. Regarding the issue of prescriptive rights, he commented that the Commission does not sit as a court on that decision. He said there has been no evidence presented to the City that concludes that they have easement rights over Forecast property. He stated the Commission may still consider the actions or requests of the homeowners. He noted the developer has indicated a willingness to consider providing a pedestrian gate for emergency exit into the apartment project. He said the developer had also indicated a willingness to consider a turn- around at the end of Chervil Street, but staff pointed out there is sufficient room on the existing properties without going onto the applicant's property. He said all parties involved could solve the problem with cooperation or on their own. He remarked that a representative of the Fire District was there and had indicated to staff that the proposed project benefits the fire safety elements of the existing homes. He said there is currently a surrounding field that may or may not be maintained and the Fire District had indicated the project could create a firebreak around the existing homes. With respect to the trash trucks and safety equipment coming up the private street, he said the maintenance of the private street is the responsibility of the homeowners and they need to repair potholes or widen the street if necessary. He indicated staff does not believe it should be the • Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 23, 2002 obligation of the developer to pave Chervil or run new utility lines. He believed the Glover and Rustling properties have electrical service off Chervil Street, so he felt there must be some utility access easements in place. He noted the applicant agreed to run the other services along the most southerly property line. He said he could not respond to the postal delivery comment other than to state the Post Office will provide postal service to the residents. He was not sure why the mailboxes were moved because Etiwanda Avenue is not being widened in that location, but merely replacing one curb with another curb. He said the Fire District staff personnel were available to answer questions with respect to the existing homes. He noted the Fire District indicated the current dirt road is probably not the best maintained for serviceability. Mr. Buller stated it is a private drive and is the responsibility of the private property owners. With respect to the 2% acres, he noted the residents were correct that the applicant is not proposing a change or development on that parcel tonight and the Commission therefore had no action before them on that parcel. He said the current resolution is conditioned to require sidewalk and street improvements along the front of that parcel be consistent with respect to curb and gutter and sidewalk. Mr. Buller said staff believes the environmental documentation presented to the Commission is sufficient under the environmental requirements and shows there are no significant impacts that would require the City to deem the project infeasible or unapprovable. He said staff believes the driveway is of sufficient capacity to serve the vehicle trip generations onto Etiwanda Avenue. He noted the applicants do not want their new driveway tom up for future utility access, therefore, they will provide the ability for the parcels which are not a part of this project to get access without having to tear up the improvements. Chairman McNiel asked if it would cover all utilities including telephone. Mr. Buller believed the applicant has indicated he would include all utilities. Chairman McNiel felt the potential alteration of the sidewalk, potential relocation of dumpsters, and light coverings for glare could be handled by staff. Mr. Buller suggested a condition be added that the landscaping and sidewalk and trash enclosure locations adjacent to the existing homes along Chervil Street be subject to City Planner review and approval. He said he would be sure the property owners are notified of that decision. Chairman McNiel asked if that would include the property-adjacent landscaping. Mr. Buller responded affirmatively. Commissioner Stewart suggested that Fire District personnel respond to the residents'comments. Ralph Crane, Fire Marshal, stated he visited the site earlier in the day after being contacted by the residents along Chervil Street. He said the support of the Fire District is a standard conceptual support. He observed there are a lot of places in the District that are existing non-conforming: and any time those areas can enhance their existing water supply or access, it is a benefit to the emergency services that can be provided. He said he directed the questions related to fire hydrants to Cucamonga County Water District, as they are the proper agency to address hydrant issues and water supply issues with the individual property owners. He also noted that several suggestions were made to the property owners regarding things they could do immediately to improve the Fire District's ability to respond rapidly and those suggestions are not dependent upon the project itself. He said that includes putting addresses on the existing homes that don't have addresses on them, removing the limbs on some of the trees that may block access, and grading the road to allow for faster response. He stated that the Fire District definitely feels sprinklered residences are a lower fire risk than a grassy vineyard left to grow. He said the Fire District has no issues that have not been satisfied on the project being proposed; but they do have concerns with the existing residences, which were addressed to those owners. Planning Commission Minutes -7- January 23, 2002 Commissioner Mannerino stated this is one of the areas of the City that is in transition. He said it is difficult because Etiwanda continues to be the more rural part of the City and it is now changing as the whole City has changed. He said he has reminded people on several occasions that he used to shoot rabbits where City Hall now sits. He thought it may have been better if there had been another meeting between the developer and the residents on Chervil Street; however, he felt the primary thrust of the problem is that the current residents do not want apartments and medium density structures around their homes. He observed that that the area is zoned for that use and has been so zoned for at least 20 years. He said that anyone who buys the property will build the maximum number of units that it is zoned for because that is how you make money in real estate. He felt that if this developer does not build, it will be another developer and it will be high density housing around the current residents because that is how the area is zoned. He saw nothing that would negate a Negative Declaration with the conditions that were being imposed. He felt there was some more detail that may be worked out such as site changes and landscaping and he urged the developer to continue his dialogue to adjust the tract and make it more palatable to the residents and he thought Mr. Previty will do so. Commissioner Mannerino felt it is a project which complies with the standards and he noted that even some of the residents have commented that it is nice looking. He supported the project with adjacent landscaping and the additional conditions proposed by Mr. Buller. Commissioner Stewart concurred with Commissioner Mannerino. She also felt the project could have benefited from another neighborhood meeting to iron out some of the things. She was comfortable with the fire and safety issues that the Fire District discussed. She said the bottom line is that the property is zoned Medium and that is how it will be developed. She supported the project with the additional suggested conditions to address the identified issues subject to City Planner approval. Commissioner Macias stated the land use designation has been that way for a long time and withstood public scrutiny during the recently approved General Plan. It said it is unfortunate that there are often homeowners stuck in this kind of a situation. He agreed with Commissioner Mannerino that this is a time of change and this is an area that has been struck for change. Taken as a whole, he felt the project benefits the City as a whole. He noted there are going to be some losers, and that is because of the change and movement that the City is going in. He supported the project. Mr. Buller observed that Planning Condition 7 of the Conditional Use Permit resolution already provides that additional landscaping and trees shall be provided at the interior project perimeter adjacent to the existing single-family residences subject to City Planner approval. He felt the minutes will reflect that the intent is to screen out the visibility from the upstairs windows of the project's buildings into the neighbors' properties. He said staff will be looking for evergreen trees and shrubs to do that. He stated staff would also be looking for the type of plant materials that would deter people from wanting to get close to the block wall from the apartment side to reduce the potential for graffiti. He suggested adding a condition regarding lighting to limit free-standing lights to a maximum of 15 feet, prohibit security lighting fixtures from projecting above the fascia or roofline, and shield all lighting to confine light spread within the project boundaries. He also suggested adding a condition that final sidewalk locations and the trash enclosure location immediately adjacent to Chervil Street be subject to City Planner review and approval. He asked if the Commissioners wished to add a condition with respect to utility connections, noting that the applicant had gone on record that they will do it because it will benefit the project. Commissioner Mannerino stated that if the applicant had indicated a willingness to do it, a condition should be added. Mr. Buller suggested the applicant respond. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 23, 2002 Mr. Previty said they did not necessarily agree to stub to each residence. He said the concern of the residents was that they felt their zoning would be changing in the near future to conform to the General Plan and they thought the Forecast project would prevent them from developing as a multi- family project in the future. He agreed to stub the utilities at a common point on the south property line of Mr. Glover and Mr. Rusling's property. He noted that properties along Chervil Street can access from Etiwanda Avenue and said he would even go so far as to stub for additional water and sewer lines for them because of the high spot in the road for Chervil Street. He was agreeable to any condition that would reflect that agreement. Mr. Buller suggested inserting a condition that the applicant shall provide underground utility connections to the lots surrounded by the proposed project pursuant to an agreement between the owners of this project and the interior lots. He suggested that the agreement provide that the applicant would be reimbursed for the portion of the cost of the utility connections that would represent the benefit pro-rata share provided to the lots surrounded by the project. He said that way the project proponent and the residents would have to determine where the best point is and the cost. Mr. Previty said he was not proposing that he be reimbursed. Chairman McNiel felt the wise thing to do would be to put the stubs in where they need to be. Mr. Buller suggested the condition then read that the applicant shall provide connections to the lots. Chairman McNiel thought it should be to the property lines. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, asked if the Commission was speaking only of water and sewer. Chairman McNiel stated he was thinking all utilities. Commissioner Stewart agreed. Commissioner Mannerino stated they were talking about water, sewer, gas, and electric. Commissioner Stewart agreed. Chairman McNiel added telephone and cable. Mr. Previty said they would be amenable to such a condition assuming that the regulating agencies are agreeable. Chairman McNiel again closed the public hearing. He noted that there had been a discussion regarding the wall and noted the applicant agreed to provide either view fencing or a block wall. He asked that staff clarify which the homeowners would prefer. Mr. Buller suggested modifying Planning Condition 2 to provide for either a wrought iron fence or wall subject to City Planner review and approval. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Macias, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16257 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00557 with modifications to clarify the lighting requirements and provide for City Planner approval of the wall, sidewalk and trash enclosure locations, and underground utility connections. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 23, 2002 AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried F. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 01-01, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 01-02,AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT15716- FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC.—A public hearing to consider certifying the final Environmental Impact Report(EIR)and approving the Statement of Facts and Findings and Overriding Considerations for the proposed project known as Victoria Gardens, a mixed use development consisting of approximately 2.45 million square feet of retail, office,and civic uses, as well as up to 600 multiple family residential units, on approximately 175 acres of land. The project site is within the City boundary and the Victoria Community Plan and is generally bounded by future Church Street to the north, Foothill Boulevard to the south, 1-15 Freeway to the east, and future Day Creek Boulevard to the west-APN: 227-161-35, 36 and 38; 227-171- 22 and 23; 227-201-30, 33, 35, and 36; and 227-211-24 and 39 through 43. G. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 01-02—FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC.—A request to establish a Development Agreement and the detailed review of a master plan for a project known as Victoria Gardens, a mixed-use development consisting of approximately 2.45 million square feet of retail, office,and civic uses, as well as 600 multiple family residential units, on approximately 175 acres of land. The project site is within the City boundary and the Victoria Community Plan, generally bounded by future Church Street to the north, Foothill Boulevard to the south, 1-15 Freeway to the east, and future Day Creek Boulevard to the west-APN: 227-161-35, 36 and 38; 227-171-22 and 23; 227-201- 30, 33, 35, and 36; and 227-211-24 and 39 through 43. Related files: Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01 and Tentative Parcel Map 15716. H. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 01-01 —FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC.—A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan by changing the land use designation from Regional Center to Mixed Use and modifying various text sections and graphics in the Community Plan to accommodate the proposed project known as Victoria Gardens on approximately 175 acres of land, generally bounded by future Church Street to the north, Foothill Boulevard to the south, 1-15 to the east, and future Day Creek Boulevard to the west-APN: 227-161-35, 36 and 38; 227-171-22 and 23; 227-201-30, 33, 35, and 36; and 227-211-24 and 39 through 43. Related files: Development Agreement 01-02 and Tentative Parcel Map 15716. I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTT15716 — FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC. — A request to subdivide approximately 147acres of land into 97 parcels and 39 lettered lots (private and public streets) to accommodate the proposed project known as Victoria Gardens on approximately 175 acres of land, generally bounded by future Church Street to the north, Foothill Boulevard to the south, 1-15 Freeway to the east, and future Day Creek Boulevard to the west- APN: 227-161-35, 36 and 38; 227-171-22 and 23; and 227-201-30, 33, 35, and 36. Related files: Development Agreement 01-02 and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report with respect to the Environmental Impact Report and indicated the latest version of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan was in front of the Commissioners as well as pages to indicate that the Etiwanda Avenue/Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue (4th Street) intersections would be switched from the unavoidable impacts section to be mitigated. Planning Commission Minutes -10- January 23, 2002 Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report with respect to the Development Agreement, Victoria Community Plan Amendment, and Parcel Map. He suggested revisions to the resolutions to clarify conditions of approval with respect to what had been agreed to by staff and the developer. He also indicated there were slight text changes to the Master Plan text in front of the Commissioners. Commissioner Stewart asked for clarification regarding automobile sales and service uses on Main Street and coin operated car washes on Route 66. She did not recall any discussions regarding those uses. Mr. Le Count responded that it was his understanding that the applicant would be willing to accept a requirement that coin operated car washes be a conditional use as opposed to being a permitted use but he thought they were adamant about keeping them as a use. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Co Im Macken, Forest City Development, 949 South Hope Street, #200, Los Angeles, expressed thanks for the opportunity to appear before the Commission. He introduced Randall Lewis of Lewis Operating Company; Frank Fuller and Yahn Taylor of Field Paoli (Master Plan and architects); David Birksen of SWA Landscape Architects; civil engineer Stan Morse; attorney Josh Gottheim of Brand, Winfield and Canasari; Victor Grgas of Forest City; and consultant Steve Wessen. He thanked City staff for input and working with them. He noted they appeared before the Design Review Committee on four occasions and said its comments and suggestions were helpful and were incorporated into design modifications for the project. He felt they had addressed concerns raised by staff and the Design Review Committee and made modifications to the planning and design when needed. Frank Fuller, Principal, Field Paoli gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Master Plan. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Stewart asked for clarification regarding automobile sales and service uses on Main Street as conditionally permitted uses and coin operated car washes on Route 66 as a permitted use. Mr. Macken said that such uses would be more likely to occur in the Route 66 area or the eastern area. He did not think it would occur in the Main Streets area. Commissioner Stewart said she could not envision such uses in the Main Streets area. Victor Grgas, Forest City Development, observed that Paragraph 4.3a-1 listed uses that should not be included in the Main Streets area. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the intent of 4.3a-1 was to not allow such uses. Chairman McNiel asked if the intent was to delete the use from Main Streets but not to preclude it from other areas. Mr. Macken confirmed that was their intention. Chairman McNiel stated that if it were struck from Main Street, he felt a conditional use permit would be appropriate in any other location in the City. Mr. Buller questioned the intent of Paragraph 4.3c with respect to the Route 66 area. Commissioner Mannerino thought it meant they are not permitted at all. Planning Commission Minutes -11- January 23, 2002 Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, suggested that the ambiguity could be resolved by revising 4.3a-1 to read that automotive sales and services uses shall not be permitted. Chairman McNiel agreed. He reopened the public hearing. Mr. Macken said that one of the department stores they are talking to has a tire, battery, and accessory facility and they would like to be able to include it in the Main Streets area with a conditional use permit. He stated there is not one currently in the plan, but they wanted to be able to accommodate such an auxiliary use. Mr. Buller suggested adding that they would not be permitted unless ancillary to a major retail user, subject to a conditional use permit. Chairman McNiel said that would be acceptable. Mr. Macken concurred. Mr. Buller asked for clarification regarding car washes in the Route 66 area. He believed it is likely that there may be an automated car wash in conjunction with a service station. He was not sure of the Commission's feelings regarding a coin-operated car wash in that area. He asked if the applicant wants automotive sales and service uses and car washing facilities in that area. Mr. Macken stated they do not currently have such a user, but he felt confident there will be some sort of car wash. Chairman McNiel felt the uses need to be defined. He felt the applicant probably was probably looking for a service station with an attached car wash or an integrated car wash as opposed to a transmission service facility. Mr. Macken said they do not know what those uses would be as yet. Commissioner Mannerino felt that a transmission service use may have a good-looking facility and a conditional use permit would allow the City to apply appropriate conditions. He felt automotive uses would be appropriate on Route 66. Chairman McNiel agreed. Mr. Buller suggested changing Paragraph 4.3c2 to indicate that automotive sales and service uses including car washing would be subject to a conditional use permit. Chairman McNiel felt that was good. Mr. Macken indicated that would be acceptable. Chairman McNiel again closed the public hearing. He noted that within the PowerPoint presentation, there was an exhibit that shows two major signs along the freeway. He noted there had been some discussions regarding those signs and he made his position dear that he was not in favor of allowing the second sign because he does not want the appearance of billboards running down the freeway. He wanted to be sure it was clear that the second sign is not approved merely because it was in the presentation. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the Environmental Impact Report for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01, Development Agreement 01-02, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT15716 and adoption of the Statement of Facts Planning Commission Minutes -12- January 23, 2002 and Findings and Overriding Considerations as amended by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of Development Agreement 01-02 and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01 and approving Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT15716 with modifications recommended by staff and clarification of the wording in the Master Plan with respect to automotive uses. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried Chairman McNiel stated the community deserves the best and he was sure the applicant will live up to the promises made. The Commission recessed from 9:26 p.m. to 9:32 p.m. J. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2001-00778 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES - A request to construct a temporary modular recreation building of 360 square feet in the Mountain View Apartments (Tract 12365) in The Medium-High Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre)of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Spruce Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway-APN: 1077-651-07. Debra Meier, Contract Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked for confirmation that the modular building would be removed within one year. Ms. Meier confirmed that was correct. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Christopher Greiner, Lewis Apartment Communities, thanked staff for its assistance. He said the modular until will allow them to get a jump-start on their after-school programs. He hoped the trailer will not be there longer than a year. Chairman McNiel asked if it will be handicapped accessible. Mr. Greiner confirmed that it will. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Mannerino, to adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00778. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 23, 2002 K ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2001-00437 - EXXON MOBIL OIL CORPORATION-A request to construct a new 3,946 square foot service station with convenience market, drive-thru carwash, and pump island on 1.39 acre of land in the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive-APN: 1077-421-38. Related file: Preliminary Review DRC2001-00247. Kirt Coury, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Ken Barton, Fred Fielder&Associates, thanked planning and engineering staff and agreed to the conditions. He stated they will be processing a lot line adjustment , which will increase the size of the project to 1.85 acres. He noted that Engineering Conditions 4 and 6 require conditions that already exist. With respect to the planting of trees in the parking lot, he noted that there are two trees immediately in front of the entry to the station. He said that cars park there and he asked that they be permitted to trim the trees so that the lowest branches would be 7 feet off the pavement for safety reasons. Chairman McNiel and Commissioner Stewart agreed that would be acceptable. Mr. Barton said that Standard Conditions 0.1 and 0.6 are already in place. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer noted that the conditions are there in case the applicant wishes to put in a new driveway. He said the property line is back far enough and they shouldn't need additional dedication. Mr. Barton indicated that streetlights are already in place on Town Center and they are listed as being required improvements in Standard Condition P.1. Chairman McNiel questioned if the standard conditions are included just to be sure the City gets those items. Mr. James confirmed that was correct. Mr. Barton said he understood they would be liable to replace items if they are damaged during construction. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel dosed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Macias,to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00437. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried NEW BUSINESS L. PRELIMINARY REVIEW DRC2002-00014- ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT-A courtesy review of General Plan consistency of the proposed site acquisition of approximately 18.2 acres of land for an elementary school in the Estate Residential District (up to 1 dwelling unit per acre), located on the north side of Banyan Street, west of East Avenue-APN: 225-122- 39, 40, 85, and 86. Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 23, 2002 Kirt Coury, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comments, but there were none. He questioned if a portion of the 18.2 acres would be for land banking. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the site contains more acreage than they need but it is the way the lots are currently configured. He said they have discussed using the flag area in conjunction with Etiwanda Creek Park, which is located immediately across the street. Commissioner Stewart felt it was important to send a strong message that they should heed the traffic considerations. She did not feel this is a safe area. She also thought the School District should be responsible for some of the infrastructure. She felt there are serious issues. It was the consensus of the Commission that the location is consistent with the General Plan and staff was directed to forward comments to the School District outlining the concerns noted in the staff report. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional Commission business. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, carried 4-0-1 (Tolstoy absent),to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Br- •-'Iler Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -15- January 23, 2002