Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/10/22 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting October 22, 2008 Chairman Fletcher called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:07 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, Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart; Ray Wimberly ABSENT: Frances Howdyshell STAFF PRESENT: Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner; Donald Granger, Senior Planner; Beth Hartley, Planning Aide; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner; Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Denise Sink, Office Specialist II; James Troyer, Planning Director Tabe Van der Zwaag, Associate Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS James Troyer, Planning Director, announced the promotion of Donald Granger to the position of Senior Planner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 2-0-1-2 (Howdyshell absent, Fletcher, Stewart abstain), to approve the minutes of October 22, 2008. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN REVIEW DRC2008-00587 - LEGG MASON REAL ESTATE INVESTORS, INC. -Development and Design Review of the Thomas Winery Plaza by adding a 13,969 square foot commercial/grocery building and demolition of two non-historic commercial buildings of 13,828 square feet with additional site, landscaping and signage changes in the Specialty Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 2) at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue; APN 0208-101-22, 23, 24,and 25. This project is categorically exempt per Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City CEQA Guidelines. It is a Class 2b categorical exemption because the project includes replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose, and capacity. Related Files: Preliminary Review DRC2007-01019; Tree Removal Permit DRC2008-00590; Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00588; Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2008-00591 and Variance DRC2008-00781 • • B. VARIANCE DRC2008-00781 -LEGG MASON REAL ESTATE INVESTORS, INC. -A request to allow for an increase to the parking light pole height standard from 15 feet to 18 feet for Development Design Review DRC2008-00587 located in the Specialty Commercial District at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue;APN 0208-101-22,23, 24,and 25. Related Files: Development/Design Review DRC2008-00587; Preliminary Review DRC2007-01019; Tree Removal Permit DRC2008-00590; Uniform Sign Program DRC2008- 00588 and Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2008-00591. C. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2008-00588 - LEGG MASON REAL ESTATE INVESTORS, INC. -Uniform Sign Program for the Thomas Winery Plaza located in the Specialty Commercial District at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue;APN 0208-101-22, 23, 24, and 25. Related Files: Development/Design Review DRC2008-00587; Preliminary Review DRC2007-01019; Tree Removal Permit DRC2008-00590; Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2008-00591 and Variance DRC2008-00781. The minutes for Items A, B, and C are duly recorded and incorporated with the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission minutes related to Item A of that agenda. The vote for Items A, B, and C of the Planning Commission agenda taken at that meeting is shown below: Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Munoz, to adopt the Resolutions approving Landmark Alteration Permit DRC2008-00591 to relocate the historic artifacts at the Thomas Winery Plaza, to approve Development Design Review DRC2008-00587 and establishing the hours of operation of 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and to allow the applicant to process a Minor Development Review application for a cart corral for review by staff,thereby modifying Standard Condition D-12 found on page A, B, C -55 of the agenda packet, to approve Variance DRC2008-00781 and to approve the Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00588 by minute action. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL - carried - The.Commission took a brief recess at 8:25 p.m. and the students were excused. The meeting continued at approximately 8:35 p.m. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00542 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES-The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for the development of a 122 room hotel, with the incidental serving of beer and wine, totaling 94,000 square feet on 2.97 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6) within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street - APN: 0210-081-13. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Donald Granger presented the staff report and made a special point to thank and acknowledge the Architect on this project. Chairman Fletcher asked if the undergrounding condition on D-75 is ok the way it is. Mr. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the changes have been made and set in front of the Commissioners. Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 22, 2008 Charles Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, stated it is his belief that the design presented will be a competitive design with surrounding buildings. He stated he is on board with the Condition that Engineering proposed and is excited about the architectural design. He commented on the new types of material, which will be the first used in the City. He stated he has reviewed all the Conditions of Approval and is in agreement. He commented on his request for an ABC liquor license for beer and wine only and that they are not here asking to serve hard liquor. He commented on how he has gotten together with Staff and the Engineering Department regarding traffic and the moving of the traffic signals stated called out on pages D-73 and D-74. He expressed there wasn't a lot of support on this matter as for as-assisting with the funding of relocating them. He commented on how Planning should look at the big picture of a project or future projects and install equipment in a more practical place rather than relocating them when a project is being developed. He thanked Staff, the Commission and the Design Review Committee for all their help and support during this project. • Chairman Fletcher asked Mr. Buquet if he has read all the Conditions of Approval and is in agreement. Mr. Buquet stated he has read them and is in agreement. Commissioner Stewart asked if the technical school across the street from the hotel will have a high use for the hotel. Mr. Buquet stated that possibly on a management or instructor level. Chairman Fletcher stated there is a condition to protect or relocate traffic signal equipment as required. He asked Mr. Buquet if he is in agreement with this condition and if so, the movement of any equipment would be at the expense of the applicant. ' Mr. Buquet stated he understood that to be his responsibility and is in agreement. • Chairman Fletcher opened the floor for public comment. Seeing and hearing no comment, he closed the floor. Vice Chairman Munoz commented that he liked the project and felt it was great timing with the way the economics are today. He stated the project has a good design; it is on a good corner in a good city and recommends that we approve the project and move forward. Commissioner Wimberly concurred with Vice Chairman that it is a good project and in a good location. Commissioner Stewart stated that she is in agreement with her fellow commissioners. She commented that she was on the Design Review Committee and helped work with this project. She commented on how Mr. Buquet comes prepared and ready to answer any questions. She stated that she hopes that the hotel will be complementary to the UTI Building across the street. She commented on the two designs of each building and stated the view of the two designs will be exceptional. She stated that she felt the hotel needs the ABC license to be competitive in the area. She concurred with her fellow commissions and recommended approval. Chairman Fletcher concurred with the commissioners and stated that the project was designed very well. He stated it had that upscale suburban look; it will complement the office buildings on Haven. He stated that he had no concerns with having the ABC license and that it is an appropriate use for the hotel. Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 22, 2008 • Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2007-00542 and to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL - carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2008-00593-CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA-A request to modify the definition. of landscaping under Section 17.02.140 of the Development Code to allow for synthetic turf. Staff has prepared a negative declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to City Council for further action. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Wimberly asked if the current text has changed. Ms. Nakamura stated that was correct, that some of the text has been changed to show Landscaping as turf instead of lawn and to put the words"natural"or synthetic"in parentheses. She stated that the City is trying to make it clear that the only synthetic turf is the only synthetic landscaping product allowed. Commissioner Stewart stated that she feels it is a good product and this is the direction that the City needs to go towards. She stated that by looking at the different samples presented to the Commissioners, that different types/styles would be used for different applications. Vice Chairman Munoz stated that in the description of the amendment it does not specify any restrictions on color. He stated that he had personally seen a football field made of synthetic material and colored purple. He stated it was appropriate for that particular use but would not be for residential or commercial. He asked if we could define that to clarify using green turf only. Ms. Nakamura stated that this is something we can consider. She stated that the City can look into a more comprehensive set of standards for Landscaping. Chairman Fletcher stated he concurred with Vice Chairman Munoz and commented that there should be either a permit or a review process in place. Ms. Nakamura stated she does not disagree, but conditions must be worded very carefully because of AB-1881 stating that any landscape over 2500 square feet requires a permit and adhere to a water budget, that includes both commercial and residential landscape. She stated because of the extensive guidelines that are in the AB-1881, the City has kept the Amendment simple at this time, but the City is taking a close look at this and is trying to approach it in the best possible way. Chairman Fletcher asked if there would be any standards for the installation. 'Ms. Nakamura stated that the standards for installation are usually set by the manufacturer and not a do-it-yourself project. She commented on how the turf is installed and what is required. Chairman Fletcher commented on how you can purchase synthetic turf now at local stores,such as Costco. He stated although the City may not have a large demand for the turf, there will be those who do install it and install it on their own. He asked how that would be monitored and if the City could put some minimum standards for any home installation projects. Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 22, 2008 Vice Chairman Concurred with Chairman Fletcher and stated that he felt if we didn't have some standards in place the City would be taking the chance of a yard with poor installation and possible even the color purple. James Troyer, Planning Director, stated that what we are looking for are not really conditions but asked the Commission if they would prefer some enforcement provisions in case something goes wrong. Chairman Fletcher stated that is correct. He requests a minimal policy for the City to go by. Mr. Troyer asked if Staff could put together a report and come back to the Commission in two weeks. Ms. Nakamura stated that would be acceptable. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Stewart, to continue the item until the Planning Commission Meeting scheduled November 12, 2008. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND AMENDMENT TO VICTORIA ARBORS MASTER PLAN DRC2007-00047 - AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - A request to change the Victoria Arbors Master Plan land use designation from School to Mixed Use to allow for single-family Low-Medium Residential (4-6 dwelling units per acre) designation for 8.79 acres of land, located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park Lane and Long Meadow Drive- APN: 0227-171-29 and 30. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18449. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Steve Fowler presented the staff report. John Morrisett, 16830 Ventura Boulevard, suite 401, American Beauty Development Company, thanked Staff for all their help and efforts in this project. He concurs with Staffs recommendation of August 27, 2008, the Tract Map was approved subject to bringing this project in front of Commissioners tonight. He stated that he stands before the Commission and requests that the project be recommended to the Council for final approval. Chairman Fletcher opened the floor for public comment. Seeing and hearing no comment, he closed the floor. Commissioner Stewart commented that this project is a house cleaning item and straight forward. Vice Chairman Munoz concurred with Commissioner Stewart. He stated that the school district has shown no interest in building any schools at this location. Chairman Fletcher stated this project is an appropriate amendment to the Master Plan. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Stewart, to approve the attached resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Victoria Arbors Master Plan Amendment DRC2007-00047. The item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -5- October 22, 2008 AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL R 4 ♦ f Commissioner Stewart recused herself from hearing Items G and H for reasons of possible conflict of interest. G. REVOCATION OF ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 89-04R - PEPPER'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT - To consider revocation of an Entertainment Permit in conjunction with a restaurant use, located at 9740 19th Street-APN: 1076-011-10. Related File: Entertainment Permit 87-06R H. REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-06R - PEPPER'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT-To consider revocation of a Conditional Use Permit for the serving of alcoholic Beverages in conjunction with a restaurant use, located at 9740 19th Street-APN: 1076-011- 10. Related File: Entertainment Permit 89-04R Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He gave a brief history and chronology of events noting that numerous calls for service had occurred and that a new report from the Police Department had been received covering the time period of June 6 to October 21. He noted that there were more calls in the first 6 months of 2008 than for all of 2007. He highlighted the issues addressed in the staff report. He noted that the calls for service have continued even since the time of staffs visits to the site. He said the applicant has made some of the changes that staff has requested. He introduced the officer that had worked on the case. Deputy Alex Contieff stated he has been with the Police Department for 3 years and that he has 111 experience in responding to calls for service to the location. He said he has been part of a special task force that deals with problems with bars in Rancho Cucamonga. He said the Sheriffs joined with the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) and they did a compliance check on the business (and other similar businesses in Rancho Cucamonga), which resulted in a citation for serving alcohol to someone already intoxicated. He noted that several incidents were related to their bouncer(s)being involved in fights in that they would ask a patron to leave, and then the bouncer or another employee followed them out of the bar and instigated a fight or assaulted them,and sometimes were beaten to the point of unconsciousness. The officer noted 7 incidents of this type last year, and 5 this year and he noted that some incidents go unreported because victims do not want to be victims. He said there have been times where victims would come to the police station to make a report the following day and that the report is then difficult to follow up on because at that point, the details of the incident may be lost. He said recently since July of this year there have been 9 assaults, 1 DUI, 5 charges of drunkenness in public and 2 other incidents. Chairman Fletcher commented that the business is being operated as a bar and it should not be operated as a bar. He asked if the owner is on the premises and if the bartender that was cited was the owner. Officer Contieff indicated that he personally was not there when the ABC did the compliance check. Chairman Fletcher asked if the altercations were occurring with City residents or people from outside of the City. Officer Contieff stated that it has been a mixture,that some regular patrons are residents that have become good friends with the bouncers and other employees. He said sometimes the regular patrons join in the fight and then people scatter when the deputies arrive. He said people do not Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 22, 2008 • want to point fingers, but it becomes a vicious circle because some are frightened and do not want o make a report. He said it is a major problem to constantly respond to their calls for the PD, Fire and ambulance services. He said there have been multiple victims and that the problem has been going on for 3 years. Chairman Fletcher commented that when his wife has gone to the grocery store there late at night, she has observed motorcycles parked on the sidewalk. He asked if it is referred to as a"biker bar.." Officer Contieff stated that he does not classify the business as such. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Michael Patton stated he is the landlord and owner of the building. He said he was unaware of most of these issues. He thanked staff for their assistance. He said motorcycles on the sidewalk have been a big problem for 20 years along with skateboarders. Chairman Fletcher said the staff report indicates the business has been operating without a license for 3 years. He asked Mr. Patton if he would normally lease to a tenant without seeing their business license. Mr. Patton stated the lease agreement is 29 pages and the businesses are obligated to comply with all the laws. He said he normally leaves it to the business owner to comply with City rules. He admitted he should have asked to see the business license. Bonnie Mason stated she has been a resident since 1982 and a patron of Pepper's for many years. She said the business has a more mature aged clientele and that the owners are quick to handle situations and they ask problem customers to leave. She said they manage and are responsible neighbors and they made the requested changes to the business in only a couple of weeks. She noted the poor economy and resulting problems if there is an empty building and the business should be given a chance to comply. She said in the later evening hours, some patrons come in already intoxicated and that many incidents involve off-duty police officers. She said she believes there is a vendetta towards the business because some of the altercations involving the off-duty officers. Mark Michau stated he takes his family there, he thinks it is a nice environment and that he is the one with the motorcycle mentioned earlier. Jennifer Stafford said she has been employed there for 7 years and that she believes the number of fights have decreased. She said she never felt threatened in any way while there, that it is not like a club and no bandanas or "colors" are allowed. Jessica Larena said she is a resident and a bartender at Pepper's on the day shift. She said before the current owners took over she felt very uncomfortable there. She said it is now a safe place with family clientele. She said the owners treat the customers and employees with respect and understanding. She said her shift is from 11:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Chairman Fletcher asked what the night shift is. Ms. Larena said she was not sure when the night shift ends but she thought that they were closing at 2:00 a.m. Robert Cruz said he has known the owners for many years. He said he frequently goes there. He said altercations are always taken outside. He said he has never seen friends jump in to the fight and he enjoys going there. He stated he has a motorcycle and he parks it on the sidewalk. Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 22, 2008 Frank Frias stated he is one of the owners of Pepper's. He said he has been working with Mr. Nicholson and Tabe van der Zwaag regarding the problems. He produced before and after pictures of the business showing what they have done such as lowering the bar tables. He said when he purchased the business, he just followed what the previous owner did and he kept all the old employees; he tried to do everything the same. He said there were problems with the plumbing and AC but the kitchen has never been closed. He said they made alterations because of the plumbing problems by serving food in the bar area during the repairs and kept serving food. He said he did not know he had to have a permit to change tables and they just enhanced the business. He said he gets positive customer feedback and it is a family oriented business and his mom is the cook. He said he is a first time business owner and he and his partner attended the ABC class to help understand what they need to do. He said he has not done all things correctly. He said he has complied with all 6 items and they had been working on things prior to receiving the letter from staff. He produced a diagram and indicated that the dance floor is smaller and that they added a buffet table for a lunch special to promote the business. He said they are trying to comply and that they provide a full menu and they serve food until 11:00 p.m. and they close at midnight. Chairman Fletcher asked if they stay there to sober them up. Mr. Frias said they let them stay an hour to sober up, relax, enjoy their last drink because they do not want people to leave intoxicated, they give them some food before they leave. He said they removed the large TV, the video games, they do not have a band on Saturdays, they removed the beer signs from the windows and they installed security cameras. He added that people from Margarita Beach came from that business over to theirs. He said they tried to handle the situation and he asked a friend from the police department for advice. He said they would work with the City and stay within the guidelines. Chairman Fletcher asked about the ownership, if either of them has owned other restaurants, if they are on site most of the time and if they know why the number of calls doubled in the last year. fvjr. Frias said he is a part owner and that Don Wright is the other partner. He said he had worked his way up in a restaurant. He said Don did not own a restaurant prior to this one but he had worked in some. He knew there would be problems with being his own boss. He said he was a bartender for JT's (a bar). He said he also worked in the insurance business for 8 years. He said he is there most days and if they are busy, he helps the other employees. He said there was overflow from Margarita Beach and McAlans and that may be part of the reason for the additional calls;when they close, those patrons came to Pepper's. He said they have never been cited for overcrowding. Chairman Fletcher asked when they purchased the business, if they intended to run a bar. He asked how he and his partner would consider purchasing a business and not pay City fees or for a license. Mr. Frias responded they purchased it in 2004. He said it was not intended to be a bar. He said he thought the changes they made, made it look good and he was not trying to ignore the situation. He said he had no idea how the license situation was missed. He said he assumed the fees and license had been taken care of and he was not making excuses; that when he found out, he came down to City hall to take care of it. He said the fees were minimal. Chairman Fletcher commented that it was minimal but also requires compliance. Mr. Frias said if someone had let him know he would have complied, that this has been a learning experience and he is trying to comply with everything. Tim Herbers stated he has been the maintenance contractor for Mike Patton. He said Mr. Patton asked him to monitor the situation. He drove by at night on two Monday nights and he observed the Planning Commission Minutes -8- October 22, 2008 customers that were arriving at 11:00 p.m.went in and came right out , and at about 12:00 midnight he observed several trips from a taxi cab apparently called to take people home. He said a patrol car also came by at about midnight and shortly thereafter the customers were out and the door was locked. Kevin Ironside said he has been a patron for 16 years and he sees a big difference and changes to the place. He said there used to be many more bikers there before the current ownership. He said they do not allow"colors"or bandanas and it is not like a bar, and he takes his 9 year old son there. He said it is a good place to go and it would be wrong to revoke their license. Don Wright stated he is the other owner of Pepper's. He said he manages the licensing and permits for the business and it was his oversight. He said he promotes the taxicab service and that if they observe a patron wobbling toward the door and are causing a problem, they have been directed to call the PD and to have them handle it. He said they have purchased high chairs and booster seats and they cut down the entertainment to 2 days per week (Thursday and Friday). Chairman Fletcher asked if he owns another bar and if he intends to operate the business as a restaurant or a bar. He said all the testimony heard tonight refers to the business as a bar and not a restaurant. Mr. Wright said he worked for a commercial ice machine company for 13 years. He said he makes sure his partner or one or two others are there to watch the business at night. He said they encourage patrons to bring their kids and they are gearing it as a restaurant operation. He said they have 3 cooks and a lunch and breakfast crowd and are preparing for the next level of advertising. He said it is hard to keep a good reputation. Chairman Fletcher asked why they have not applied for a business license or paid fees for 3 years. Mr. Wright said he had no excuse, that in the beginning the owners were there all the time working long hours and it got overlooked. He explained that when they took over, they had a temporary license. He said he has a calendar and notebook now. Chairman Fletcher said the item is the revocation of the CUP and EP. He said if the revocation is upheld, they could lose their right to do business. He asked if they could survive operating as a restaurant if the Entertainment Permit was revoked and the bar area was restricted. Mr. Wright said yes, but it would be very difficult. He said the transition would be tough. He thought they could operate as a restaurant and he could understand if they lost their Entertainment permit, but they would at least want the permit that allows them to operate under the conditions now. Mr. Frias explained that if that was the situation, they could operate a restaurant, and if in the worst case scenario they lost their entertainment permit he could understand, but they would at least want to stay open and in business. Chairman Fletcher remarked that they have totally lacked to comply with the City license and operation and that he has given them ample opportunity to explain. Mr. Frias said they already started the process and he knows it is possible and he is 100%for it and they would do anything to comply: He said they are offering a "Tequila Dinners"whereby they would offer different kinds of tequila with a 7 course dinner. He said they hope to do that once a month. He said they need a chance to promote it. He said his mom is in the kitchen and she has great food. Planning Commission Minutes -9- October 22, 2008 Gina Frias said Pepper's offers more than the night life environment and that the kitchen has never been closed. She said their food is affordable and she sees her brothers and mom working hard to make it. She said the kitchen has never been closed. She said hopefully they can get past the nighttime issues. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing at 10:27 P.M. Vice Chairman Munoz asked when the business found out about the expired business license and if the business is in compliance as of today. Mr. van der Zwaag stated they were notified and cited in August and that they have not signed off on a business license. They did come in and apply but we have not signed off on it because they need to be in full compliance and one has not been received that says "Pepper's Restaurant." Commissioner Wimberly expressed concern that they acquired the business in 2005 and now they are being notified. He said it has been a sports bar. He said they could condition it to go forward as a restaurant but it is not the nature of business and he has concern about that. He noted the patron control problems and that they may not be able to exist as a restaurant and that they might not be able to condition all the negative things that are occurring there. Vice Chairman Munoz said this is serious stuff. He remarked that he does not like "flip" decisions, He said the applicant validated that he does not know how to run a business but if we give him the opportunity, he'll learn. He said they want a "Mulligan" for the last few years. He said long term patrons are a great thing but he is concerned about the 22 people that were assaulted in 2007 and 15 in 2008 and then an additional 9 assaults since they found out about their permit and license problems. He said they have admitted they screwed up with mismanagement. He noted that there have been a gross number of calls for service, it must be a record, and yet the applicant is asking for another chance. He said it is"Business 101"to get a license. He said he is having trouble believing they did not know this. He said that he hears the applicant is trying but they are still not in compliance and this is mismanagement. He said his (Vice Chairman Munoz') taxes are going up (because of the service calls). He said that with respect to the CUP,the proposed use is detrimental to the public safety and welfare etc. and that the Planning Commission has the right to revoke the permits for the use. He said the applicant's business plan is no plan at all and that they just want a "Mulligan" for their past mistakes. He suggested he keep his mom out of that establishment because he would be concerned about his mother being there. Chairman Fletcher noted that all the references of the establishment tonight have been as a bar and they are not licensed as a bar. He said there is question as to whether there has been a full menu at all times. He said the applicant has produced a new floorplan, they have favorable comments from patrons, and they have refurnished a bar, but there is no license for the business to be a bar, that has alcohol with a full menu. He said he did not believe anyone (managing the business) looked at the use permit and what the requirements are. He said they are offering alcohol after 11:00 p.m. and one employee has indicated that the night shift ends at 2:00 a.m. He said he had patronized the restaurant himself years ago and he had a great chili relleno there. He said they had a small bar area on the side. He went back a year ago and it was his wife's comment that it is definitely a bar. He said this has changed into a bar and not operating as the permit allows. He said they still do not have a paid license and that he finds it hard to believe that one could buy a business and not think to get the appropriate licensing and permits-that it was totally ignored by the owners for 3 years. He pointed out that there are safety issues, responses by staff, illegal operations, a number of service calls, and that their business operation, according to some of the testimony, has created a situation that is injurious to the residents of Rancho Cucamonga and not approved for that location. Chairman Fletcher added that he is a proponent of business but this business has totally ignored nor made any attempt for 3 years to comply or even try to comply. He said 1 owner said he was unsure if he would be successful as a restaurant, which is what the permit allows, but the other Planning Commission Minutes -10- October 22, 2008 says he could do it but indicated he would need to sell much alcohol to do it. He asked staff if it is possible to resolve the situation by restricting the hours of operation and by changing the layout of the bar. He said he gets irritated with owners who come to Rancho who buy a restaurant and then try to run a bar in an area where that is not permitted; it is nothing but a bar serving some snacks or food. He said maybe this is a good time to send a message to bar owners,that we will not allow this any more, that this is a drain of time and City resources to continually make them comply with their use permits. He said he is trying to find a solution. Mr. Troyer commented that they are not talking about just a business just out of compliance with a couple of conditions, it is a business out of compliance with numerous conditions of approval for a CUP and EP, and they have numerous reports from the police. He said they continue to operate and they pose a threat to the public safety and welfare. He said staff does not have confidence in proposing they alter the floor plan as a solution or that the owners would be responsible and that staff is not changing their recommendation tonight. Chairman Fletcher said that at one time it was once was a nice Mexican restaurant but it certainly is not a restaurant anymore, it is a bar. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to adopt the Resolutions revoking Conditional Use Permit 87-06 and Entertainment Permit 89-04. Motion carried by the following vote (3-0-1-1): AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL ABSTAIN: STEWART- carried Chairman Fletcher added that if the owners of the business disagree with the Commission's decision, they have the right to appeal the decision within 10 days. The Planning Commission took a brief recess at 10:45 p.m. to 10:50 p.m. Commissioner Stewart returned to the Council Chambers. I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926-WLC ARCHITECTS-A review of the Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of Lifeway Church project development including a class room wing, temporary classroom modules and multi-purpose hall on 5.03 acres of land in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle de Prado-APN: 208-921-36. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 and Non- Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544. On April 24,2002, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439. The California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director, presented the staff report. He noted that a letter was received by the Planning Commission from a neighboring resident(Charles and Barbara Rich- 8930 Balsa Street) and has been given to the Commissioners for their review. The Commissioners confirmed that they all received copies of the letter. The letter was entered into the official record. The letter stated the project was not built as explained to the neighbors by the church. The writer cited an issue with the height of the street, the grading of the property, verifiable City records, building height, the appearance of massive buildings and a wall adjacent to their property, "run around" experienced with his concerns voiced to the City such as dust, flooding, dead trees, lights Planning Commission Minutes -11- October 22, 2008 without shields, and the placement of portable classrooms. The letter states the church has not been responsive and that they did not work with the neighbors as directed by the Commission. The letter challenges the location of the gym, the approval of the project in the first place and the large size of the classrooms proposed. The letter contends that the applicant intends to operate a school. The letter indicates an issue with the enhancement of the wall with stucco and the maintenance of that wall as well as the landscaping. Mr. Rich asked for information regarding the procedures for an appeal in his letter. Chairman Fletcher asked the Commission if they have questions and for staff to respond to the letter. James Troyer, Planning Director, replied that most of the concerns raised in the letter are covered in the staff report. He said staff would be happy to respond to anything in the letter. Commissioner Stewart said she would like to go through the items she noted in the letter. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, noted the hour and asked for the Commission to indicate their consent to proceed past 11:00 p.m. The Commission took a voice vote to proceed with the meeting past 11:00 p.m. per their adopted administrative regulations. All four commissioners in attendance consented to proceeding with the meeting. Commissioner Stewart highlighted some of the items in the letter for clarification. She asked about the height of the road and the block wall as the letter indicates it was not built as the residents were lead to believe. She asked if that was a true statement. Mr. Nicholson stated he nor much of the staff was part of the approval at that time. He said that an engineer took the plans to the site and verified that the existing development including the driveway, • and parking area are built in accordance with the approved plans,which he brought to the meeting for reference. • Commissioner Stewart asked for a response regarding the 30 foot height issue. Mr. Nicholson stated that the letter is only partially true. He said there was 19 feet of fill and that this was one reason staff proposed to lower the building pad of the Multi-Purpose room by 14 feet. He said when that was done, the building would then only be approximately 5 feet above the existing grade prior to that development. Commissioner Stewart noted the City does not have a view protection ordinance. She stated she believes that has been explained, that essentially with the reduction, we end up at 5 feet. Mr. Nicholson said that is correct. He confirmed there is no view ordinance in this City. He said to address the problem of the building height several options were considered. He said numerous meetings were held with the applicant and the architect and that lowering the building pad was the more appropriate solution. Commissioner Stewart asked for an explanation regarding the possible relocation of the Multi- Purpose building. She assented to the fact that it has gone to DRC 3 times and this issue was discussed. Mr. Nicholson asserted the item came before the DRC three times and it was suggested that this building be moved to the easterly portion of the site. He said this alternative was rejected for good planning practices, ie., the desire for onsite circulation and parking separate from pedestrian use and for safety reasons. He said it would keep persons within the interior of the space. He said to move the building to the east would shift impacts and would create a large hole. Planning Commission Minutes -12- • October 22, 2008 Commissioner Stewart asked about the trees being planted as mitigation along the slope area. Mr. Nicholson reported that 39 trees would be planted on the slope and 3 or 4 would be planted just south of the Multi-Purpose hall. • Commissioner Stewart confirmed that about 50% of them would 36-inch box size. Mr. Nicholson added that the existing wall will be treated with stucco to make it more aesthetically appealing for the residents and that the trees average height at maturity will be 20-25 feet. He said when mature, it will provide a landscape backdrop for the neighboring properties. Commissioner Stewart confirmed that it would be a full tree line. Mr. Nicholson stated that is correct and expressed confidence that the church will maintain the site and landscaping. He said the site is currently immaculate and well maintained. Chairman Fletcher asked for clarification regarding the 30-foot building height limit mentioned in the letter. He said he believed it was measured from the building pad to the top of the structure. Mr. Nicholson noted that the Development Code gives three methods for measuring building heights, and just to be sure, staff applied all three methods for both buildings: measured from lowest adjacent grade to the rooftop; the second is an average taken of the highest and lowest points of the overall building height not to exceed 30 feet; and the third is using the hillside development standard which was applied because of the slope that is greater than 8%. He noted that even after applying all three methods, the building falls well within the standards in the Code. Chairman Fletcher noted that the letter questioned the grading and the raising of the building pad level. He said it appears it is being built in the normal way for a hillside property. He said he went and took another look at the site. He commented that the letter says the project slopes downward. He said he had difficulty believing that. He said to consider the other location for the Multi-Purpose room would also be problematic. Mr. Nicholson said that the 2002 Master Plan for the project included all the buildings and was approved. He said only the first phase was completed. • Chairman Fletcher asked if we have an approved grading plan. Mr. Nicholson said yes, although it did take some time to locate it. Mr. Rich felt it took too long for us to find the plans. • Chairman Fletcher said the resident's letter makes a demand for the residents to approve of the wall treatment and finish. He remarked that the resident does not have the right to get involved to that extent. Chairman Fletcher stated he is comfortable with the hillside landscape plan and that the trees will provide a visual buffer when they are in. He asked if it was possible to set a timetable for the completion of the hillside landscaping (condition#7 found on page 1-66 of the agenda packet). He said he would like to see it go in first before the buildings are built. Mr. Nicholson noted that the current condition requires it go in prior to issuance of occupancy permits. Mr. Troyer remarked that if the Commission desires it sooner, it could be changed to require this prior to issuance of building permits rather than prior to occupancy. Planning Commission Minutes -13- October 22, 2008 Vice Chairman Munoz asked from a technical standpoint, would that require the removal of trees and then a later replacement. He said it would seem to be an unnecessary cost for the church. Chairman Fletcher said his concern is with the southerly slope below the wall (adjacent to the neighboring residents). Mr. Nicholson said they would not want to apply that to the interior landscaping around the Multi- Purpose building. Chairman Fletcher referred to page 1-41, conditions 2 and 8. He asked about the maintenance of landscaping on the other side of the wall. Mr. Nicholson assured them that all conditions of the previous approval apply, but that if another condition would help, it could be added. Chairman Fletcher said he believes it is covered. Mr. Nicholson reported that at the exterior of the screen wall, there is a maintenance walkway, and that the landscape is not as dense as staff would prefer, but overall, it is being maintained. Chairman Fletcher confirmed that the requirement is that if the trees die, they will be replaced and the slope is maintained on a regular basis. He then opened the public hearing. Pastor Esteves thanked everyone for their cooperation including Planning staff, and Building and Safety. He said the church has been patient and accommodating. He said he believes the church has complied with all the requests. He noted the church employs a full-time groundsman that picks weeds weekly and waters the trees and they make sure everything is kept and is in order. He agreed that the stucco treatment for the wall and the additional trees will help with the visual appearance of the project from that lower slope. . He said they understand the reasons for the corrections and they are willing to do what needs to be done. He noted that because of the size of the trees being required, he is requesting they be allowed to install them at the time of construction. He said they have to be sure the holes are dug deep enough for the trees to take root. He said this process would require blocking traffic with large equipment and the same equipment would have to be rented twice if they are planted earlier than the other construction. He said they need to maximize their expenditure, people's donated money, and use the large equipment when it is there for construction, that otherwise the additional cost would be a hardship. He said they have show n good faith thus far and they would appreciate consideration in this. Vice Chairman Munoz clarified that the large equipment/booms could be used for other things, and maximize the use for the cost/expense. Jim Di Camillo, WLC Architects said it is also a timing issue regarding the season, that trees that size grow best when planted at the right time of year and that planting time could also affect construction timing. He said if they delay the start of construction, it will also delay the removal of the portable classrooms. He said he thought the condition is fine as it is. Chairman Fletcher asked if there is a construction timetable yet and if it is affected. Mr. Di Camillo said he was unsure of the timing just yet. Pastor Esteves said they would like to start construction as soon as possible, but the main concern is the cost. He said relocating equipment back and forth would be more costly. He said they would like to start sometime in May. Planning Commission Minutes -14- October 22, 2008 • Mr. Troyer confirmed there is no problem with stuccoing the wall at the issuance of building permits. Pastor Esteves indicated that would not be a problem. Roger Sharpe stated he lives beyond the east boundary of the property and is the goat herder and a teacher at Rancho High School. He said he is asking the church to construct a 6-foot wall along his portion of the property for purposes of privacy and safety. He said they love the church people and they have been diligent about caring for their property. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing at 11:35 p.m. Commissioner Wimberly reported that he sat in at the DRC as an observer and later as a panel member. He said the applicant worked with staff and has been responding to the conditions and concerns that were raised. He said the applicant reduced the mass of the building and he was impressed with how they proposed to do that. He said he looks forward to the project completion. He thanked the applicant and staff for their hard work. Vice Chairman Munoz commented that this project has been like a breech birth and a long gestation. He said it is difficult to build on a hill and to put it together in such a way that it won't show from a neighbor's yard. He said there is no way around it, even if they only built an outhouse, the neighbors are going to see it. He said the DRC struggled for a solution and that he as a DRC member said the applicant should work with the neighbors and staff towards a solution and that the applicant has gone above and beyond what would be expected and took on and accepted the changes and significant additional costs. He said he favors the idea of allowing the applicant to plant the trees when it is most efficient for the construction schedule. He said Mr. Rich has been very tenacious and successful in getting changes and concessions but it has gone as far as it can go. He said Mr. Rich is still not happy and he is not going to be happy and that he has worked with him for over a year at DRC. He commended staff and the applicants for their efforts. He said it has been a gentleman's game and everyone behaved themselves. He said the solution presented to the Commission tonight is a good one; the result of a year of struggle and success. He said that the City Council should understand that the applicants and staff have gone well out of their way to make this happen and it is time to move forward. Commissioner Stewart asked if a wall is proposed along the east boundary. Mr. Nicholson said there is a 6-foot, wrought iron fence along the southerly and easterly property line. He said there is an existing wrought iron fence along the north property line with a security gate and that it would tie into that. Chairman Fletcher noted that the wrought iron would preserve some views. He said he did not know what a block wall would do there. He then re-opened the public hearing. Pastor Esteves said the only reason a block wall is not proposed is because wrought iron was stipulated, but that even with a 6-foot wall, considering the down slope, people will still be able to see over it. He said he had no problem putting it in. Mr. Sharpe said it would be for privacy and will help protect their privacy except for one small portion. He added that he is extremely happy to be next to the church people. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing at 11:45 p.m. Commissioner Stewart noted that the item went before the DRC three times as well as several times before the Commission and has been under review since 2002. She remarked that you cannot disassemble buildings that are already built, it is time to approve this, the church is not going away Planning Commission Minutes -15- October 22, 2008 and they are trying to mitigate the impacts and make the project the best that it can be. She reiterated that staff used three methods to calculate the building heights and to make the Multi- Purpose building as pleasing as we can; that is almost exceptional. She noted that this is almost a higher standard than any project in our City. She said a lot is going into the landscaping; 39-40 trees, 36 - inch box size trees are huge and will grow. She said they are sensitive and tend to die because of their large roots and transplanting them will have sensitive timing to preserve them. She remarked that there is a misconception about a school being proposed there and if there is one in the future, they would have to come back as it is not part of this project at this time. She said the stucco treatment on the wall will be enhanced early on in the project in good faith to the residents. She noted that a wrought iron screen fence is being added for screening and that the portables will be moved out prior to occupancy of the building which has been one of the biggest issues. She said she would like staff to work with the applicants and neighbors for a block wall on the east side of the property. She said there have been some exceptional things done to mitigate this project. She said with the landscape mitigation, it will look like a forest. She noted she visited Mr. Rich's backyard to look at the story poles and that it is already well planted with trees and where the slope will be planted with more trees. She said yes, you could see some building mass and story poles, but you could only see them through trees. Chairman Fletcher said he agreed with all of Commissioner Stewart's comments. He added that the problem has been the combination of the topography and the close proximity of the hillside to the residents. He said they have a landscape solution, it is over and above what he expected and they reduced the mass of the building. He said this should improve the visual impact on the neighbors. He asked if adding the block wall would be appropriate and if it would impact the view of the neighbors to the north. Mr. Troyer suggested re-wording the proposed#7 condition and separate out the issue of the stucco • treatment to the wall. Chairman Fletcher noted that wrought iron does preserve some views. Mr. Troyer said the conditions would be worded as follows: 7) The wall on the southerly slope shall be enhanced with a stucco finish prior to the issuance of the Building Permits. 9) The Planning Director shall review the feasibility of the installation of a 6-foot high block wall along the easterly property line of the site in lieu of the wrought iron fencing currently shown on the Site Plan. Chairman Fletcher reiterated that he would like to see hillside planted as soon as possible in conjunction with the construction schedule. He remarked the project has good design with good worship areas. He said it is time to get started on it. He said the letter made a request for the appeal procedures to be sent to him. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Stewart, to adopt the Resolution approving DRC2006- 00926 with the noted amended conditions. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: HOWDYSHELL - carried Planning Commission Minutes -16- October 22, 2008 PUBLIC COMMENTS None COMMISSION BUSINESS Commissioner Munoz stated that in the future, all projects should include hours of operation as a Standard Condition. He said staff is excellent and he thanked them for their efforts. The Commissioners jointly expressed that the promotion for Donald Granger is well deserved. • w k x + ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Howdyshell absent),to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 12:00 Midnight Respectfully submitted, mes R. Troyer, AICP Secretary • Approved: November 12, 2008 • Planning Commission Minutes -17- October 22, 2008