Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/09/24 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting September 24, 2008 Chairman Fletcher called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:20 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,California. Commissioner Wimberely then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart; Ray Wimberly ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Adam Collier, Planning Technician; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Donald Granger, Associate Planner; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Mayuko Nakajima,Assistant Planner; Corkran Nicholson,Assistant Planning Director; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Alan Warren, Assistant Planner IANNOUNCEMENTS• • None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0, to approve the minutes of September 10, 2008 with one correction as noted on page 6. + + + • w PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2008-00143- CRESTWOOD COMMUNITIES-A request for architectural review of 50 single-family residential homes on 9.85 acres of land in the Low- Medium Residential District(4-8 du/acre), located at the northwest corner of Miller Avenue and East Avenue - APN: 1100-081-03, 04, and 06. On August 9, 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17919. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. Tabe van der Zwaag,Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He reported that staff supports an added condition (#5 - Planning), a copy of which has been placed before the Commission for • consideration. The new conditions reads: "A maximum 50 percent (9 houses) of Plan 3 may be constructed with the optional rooms over the garage (Plan 3X). " Patrick Diaz, project manager for this project for Crestwood Communities, stated he has reviewed and concurs with the resolution and conditions including the new condition suggested by staff. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Jerry Duran,13247 Miller Avenue, south of the proposed project, asked if the undergrounded electrical utility would be only to her property line or if it would be attached to service her home underfground. She wanted to know if the expense would be hers to underground her utility lines to her home. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated he did not specifically recall as the meetings regarding this issue occurred two years ago and referred the question to the developer. Chairman Fletcher commented that the City does not have the legal authority to require the developer to make improvements beyond the area of their property development. Steven Flower,Assistant City Attorney, clarified that is true as long as that specific new development does not create direct new impacts to other properties. He asked if this would cause any impact to her utilities or if it would create changes for her utility service or if it would interrupt her service. Mr. James reported that he is unaware of any direct impacts other than the relocation of the lines and there would not be an interruption of her service. Ms. Duran asked again if her lines would be above ground or below. Mr. James said the developer is under no obligation to run her lines below ground and he reiterated that he did not recall the specifics from the previous meeting. • Mr. Diaz reported that on the north side of Miller, utilities would be undergrounded as well as the feeders to the south side; under Miller to the right of way, for the residences on the south side of Miller to the right of way and then to her house would remain above ground. Chairman Fletcher confirmed her utility lines would remain above ground. Vice Chairman Munoz clarified the location and confirmed that the developer is not required to do any of that at their expense. Mr. Diaz confirmed her utility lines will remain above ground on her property. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Commissioner Howdyshell favored the development of single story homes noting that it helps fill a need in that many families are downsizing or are taking in elderly family members and that works well with single-story homes. She said she likes the square footage and the number of bedrooms and that the homes will compliment the existing development. Commissioner Wimberly expressed appreciation for a nice footprint, for their fast work in making their changes and cooperation with the City and the Design Review Committee. He said it is a good project for the community. Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 24; 2008 Commissioner Stewart noted that she was present for their review at DRC and that there were concerns regarding architecture, the driveways and layout of driveways but that they were addressed. She favored limiting the number (9) houses that offered the additional room over the garage (Plan 3X). She said it will be a nice project. Vice Chairman Munoz commented that the developer was forthcoming and speedy addressing concerns of the DRC, and they accommodated the neighbors to the north. He said he appreciated their efforts. Chairman Fletcher commented that he favors the development of 13 single story homes. He said this fits the City's needs. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell,to adopt the resolution approving DRC2008- 00143 with the added condition as noted by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried * * * * * B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2008-00160- LEWIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS - A request to change the General Plan land use designation of 14.73 acres of undeveloped land in the Terra Vista Community at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street from Office to approximately 11.83 acres of Medium-High Residential (14-24 du/acre).and 2.90 acres of Neighborhood Commercial-APN: 1077-422-01,46, and 93. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2008-00161 -LEWIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS-A request to change the Terra Vista Community Plan land use designation of 14.73 acres of undeveloped land in the Terra Vista Community at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street from Office to approximately 11.83 acres of Medium-High Residential (14-24 du/acre) and 2.90 acres of Neighborhood Commercial - APN: 1077-422-01, 46, and 93. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2008-00160, Conditional Use Permit and Development Design Review DRC2008-00163. . Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 18797 - LEWIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS-A request to rearrange the existing lot configuration and create new separate parcels on approximately 14.73 acres of land within the Office Professional District of the Terra Vista Community Plan and located north of the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive in the Terra Vista Community. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2008-00160, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2008-00161, Conditional Use Permit and Development Design Review DRC2008-00163. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT DESIGN REVIEW DRC2008-00163 - LEWIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS - A request to construct a 26,884 square foot retail commercial center on 2.90 acres of land in the proposed Neighborhood Commercial District generally located north of the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive in the Terra Vista Community-APN: 1077-422-01,46,and 93. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2008-00160, Terra Vista Community Plan Planning Commission Minutes -3- September 24, 2008 Amendment DRC2008-00161, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18747. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2008-00451 -CHURCH HAVEN COMPANY, LLC-Uniform Sign Program for the Haven Square Project north of the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive. APN: 1077-422-01,46, and 93. Related Files: General Plan Amendment . DRC2008-00160, Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2008-00161, Conditional Use Permit/Development Review DRC2008-00163, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18797. Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, noted that a copy of the Design Review Committee (DRC) Action agenda for the August 19, 2008 meeting had been placed before the Commissioners as an added exhibit for the discussion of the project. He remarked the issues noted by the DRC have been addressed and that the applicant will need to complete the process and receive approval from the Council for an ABC license for the Fresh & Easy Store. He asserted that the General Plan Amendment and Terra Vista Amendment will have to go to the Council for final approval and the approvals of the other items are contingent upon that approval. Commissioner Stewart asked how the ABC handles over-concentrations of licenses within this census area and where are the businesses that already have ABC licenses or are competing for this. Mr. Henderson responded that the ABC license request is not part of this application, however, it is not unusual to have over-concentrations in some areas, and that some areas are huge and others are small and they assess the density/population of the area and also can adjust their boundaries. He added that this part of the analysis has not been done yet. Chairman Fletcher commented that the residential portion of this application originally came forward as an age restricted senior apartment project but that it is not conditioned as such. He asked if a zone change would specifically restrict it to senior apartments. Mr. Henderson reported that the intent is to provide for senior apartments through the master plan. He noted that if they want to change the master plan,they would have to convince the Commission as to why it would be a good idea to change that. He noted that if the Commission is not comfortable with approving the residential portion, the Commission has the option of only approving the commercial and review the General Plan Amendment and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment applications at a later time. He remarked that there is not a guarantee without a development agreement in place. Steven Flower,Assistant City Attorney, remarked that staff is correct,that the application approvals could be parceled out and the commercial CUP could be approved alone. Vice Chairman Munoz remarked that they did have a pre-application review for the proposed land use. Mr. Flower commented that nothing within the master plan is changing with these applications. He said if they wanted to do something other than restricted senior housing, they would have to come back to do that. Luis Gomez, Project Manager for Lewis Community Developers, thanked staff and the Design Review Committee (DRC). He commented on the project architecture, enhanced pedestrian connections, landscaping, drought tolerant plant palette, state of the art irrigation, low impact/best practices for stormwater and water management,and the enhanced frontage for Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive. He noted the other members of his team were also present and available for questions. He commented that the project incorporates the needs of the community. He said the conditions of approval are acceptable with the exception of one. He said the Fresh & Easy store Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 24, 2008 would like to operate 24 hours per day. He referred to condition D7, a and b, found on page B,C,D,E,F -154 of the agenda packet. Mr. Henderson reported that it is a standard condition imposed because the project proposed could be adjacent to residential development and the units would be about 120 feet away from the loading area. He noted that no information was received that indicated they needed more hours than that in the PCN application. He said it is the Commission's call and they could approve the change now and revisit it later if it becomes a problem in the future. Chairman Fletcher noted the transition from commercial to residential development and that it is a standard condition. He said he would be concerned, especially if they intend to build senior apartments there. Commissioner Howdyshell agreed and said they are market rate, people are purchasing and that homeowners purchase the right to quiet and it could be a sales deterrent. Mr. Gomez said they are open to the possibility of allowing the extended hours for a specified time and come back for review if there are any problems or complaints with the neighboring residents. Vice Chairman Munoz expressed concern that we have even had problems with noise from a construction site, and with this project,the loading dock is adjacent to the proposed apartments. He suggested caution, seniors are involved, ever present in the community and they vote. He said they may even come to a meeting before the Commission and ask us how we could possibly allow loading and unloading in the wee hours of the morning. Commissioner Howdyshell noted it could affect sales of the units. Commissioner Wimberly agreed that the noise factor could affect sales. He asked for clarification if the request is for store operation hours to be 24 hours or if it is just for unloading/loading. He noted that is a significant difference of what the conditions provide for. Andy Call, representing Fresh & Easy, said their request is for 24-hour operations and loading and unloading but typical hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. He said they prefer the full flexibility of hours and then adjust to their customers accordingly. He said the conditions require they work with local police and have security cameras. He said the request is so they can receive fresh produce and stock the shelves prior to opening. He added there is 120-foot separation with a CMU wall separating them from the proposed apartments. He said they have hybrid refrigerated trucks with quieter roll up doors and they have a zero-noise, and no-idling policy. He said the trucks shut off and the refrigeration is then powered via a plug-in from the store building. He asked for the removal of the condition. Chairman Fletcher asked of normal delivery hours. He commented that loading and unloading is allowed between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Mr. Henderson corrected his interpretation of the condition and clarified that they are restricted from those activities from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Mr. Call said the stores are typically open 7-11 but they would like more hours for delivery. Mr. Henderson remarked that if it remains at 7:00 a.m., it saves staff from having to do noise monitoring. Chairman Fletcher noted it is just an hour difference from the condition. He then asked the applicants if they would like it open 24 hours and then determine the needs for the area. Planning Commission Minutes -5- September 24, 2008 Mr. Call said they would like more flexibility, they would like to keep it open 24 hours. Commissioner Stewart remarked that she heard "they like to keep it open 24 hours" but she also heard "7-11." She asked for clarification. Mr. Call clarified that they are typically open (for business) 7-11 but they do not want to be conditioned restricting them from being open 24 hours,that they would like to start with that and then adjust to their customers needs. Commissioner Howdyshell confirmed that they are asking for absolute flexibility. Garth Chambers, Project Manager for the residential portion of the project(Lewis Companies) said they are contracted with Fountain Glen and said they have submitted their application for the senior apartments and that they are in the process of addressing their incompleteness comments. He said the environmental documents are all written with the residential development of senior housing in mind. He requested that their application move forward. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Munoz said he could not support the extension of loading and unloading for 24 hours of operation. He said there is no evidence this needs to happen. Commissioner Howdyshell said she likes the composition of the project; the neighborhood commercial use with the residential use and is a mis-marked need in our community for a long time. She said this is needed along the north/south artery. She reported that she toured the Fountain Glen project and she really likes it. She said she hopes this project will be as good or better than that one. She noted her struggle with the request for the added hours and absolute flexibility with it that close to the proposed residential development. Commissioner Wimberly said he is not comfortable with 24-hour operation for the loading and off loading request. He said it would increase the noise levels probably more than anticipated. He said the project is very good. He reported that the applicant worked with the DRC and the City on colors and signage. He said the residential portion is needed development and he looks forward to seeing their new plans. Commissioner Stewart said it is a good project and a good fit for the area that we need age restricted, market rate housing product. She noted we have an aging population. She said she welcomes Fresh & Easy and that it will be convenient for people to shop there everyday. She said she disagrees with her fellow Commissioners regarding the request for extended hours. She said she is a little concerned about the loading but she would support 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. for open store hours. She said with their specialized trucks, they could include in the conditions a restriction on idling and loitering, and no stacking, and she would give it the opportunity to see if they can be compatible with the residential neighborhood. She said there cannot be a big expectation for a quiet zone in that area. She said it could be brought back to the Commission for modification of the Conditional Use Permit if it became a problem. Chairman Fletcher said it is a good project. He said he is usually hesitant to give up office/commercial land uses to residential but senior housing is in demand in our aging community and this is.a well designed project that provides a good transition that will be a compliment to the apartments. He said Fresh & Easy is a new concept, a great location for them, and he welcomed them. He offered support in concert with Commissioner Stewart to change the hours and adjust it by one hour. He said it is important for businesses to try to live within the conditions of the town but if there are other locations for this business (Fresh & Easy) that have those hours then he said he would make a concession and support the one hour change to 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -6- September 24, 2008 • • Vice Chairman Munoz said it is a great project and he appreciated the details worked out with the DRC. He said they stepped up to the plate with enhancements. He concurred that a one hour extension/change is doable but would not support a request beyond that and if that makes it normal for the business then that would be ok. He moved approval of the project and that the condition on page 154 of the agenda packet be changed to add one hour (7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.) Mr. Flower asked if the Commission was going to change 7b or just 7a of the conditions because they both reference hours of operation. Chairman Fletcher said they should match and called for a motion. Mr. Flower confirmed the hours should match in#7a, b and #8 on page 154. Commissioner Stewart asked to reopen the floor for comment and then asked if deliveries beginning at 5:00 a.m. would be helpful. Mr. Call said it would be extremely helpful to have those two extra hours in the morning. Commissioner Stewart moved that condition 7b reflect 5:00 a.m. for deliveries. Chairman Fletcher said he would prefer the first motion made and that by doing that,they would see if it becomes a problem and then the business could be brought back in. Mr. Flower confirmed that the motion is for loading and unloading and that their normal hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and a substitute motion for 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and neither has received a second. He confirmed that operational hours include the stocking of shelves prior to opening the store. I . Mr. Call said their stores are typically open from 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., deliveries and stocking occur 5:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.; the store would not be open 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. Mr. Flower asked how staff is interpreting the condition. Mr. Henderson responded as broadly as possible because that is how we would monitor the condition if it became a problem. Chairman Fletcher said he preferred the original motion and he asked if there is a second to that motion. James Troyer, Planning Director noted that there are competing motions on the floor with no seconds. He said Vice Chairman Munoz' motion is for the hours to begin at 7:00 a.m. and Commissioner Stewart's motion is to begin hours at 5:00 a.m. and if neither is seconded,then they both die for a lack of a second. Commissioner Wimberly gave his second to hours beginning at 5:00 a.m. (restrictions from 11:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.). Vice Chairman Munoz asked if the project could go down based upon the dispute over the hours. Mr. Flower said that it could if all the applications are considered together, but if the CUP is separated out from the rest then it could be handled separately. Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 24, 2008 Vice Chairman Munoz responded that with that in mind he would then support separating out the project approvals because he cannot support the suggestion of more than the one hour change request (as stated in his own motion). Commissioner Stewart replied that she does not wish the project to go down but that they should give the store the chance. She said she would be willing to withdraw her motion and that she is not suggesting they be open 24 hours. She said she does not want to see it killed because of hours. She said they are giving them some leniency to see what will work and it would probably come back anyway at a later time. She said they should give them a chance, residential is not there yet, and let them try to comply and if it does not work,the Commission can bring it back....one time event. She said she believes this situation can tolerate this change. Chairman Fletcher said it is a new project,these are standard conditions that are set for the City and if they change them for every project they will not have standard conditions anymore. He said they are asking the Commission for a change but these standard conditions are in place for a reason. He said if there was no second to Commissioner Munoz' motion, then he would second it. Commissioner Stewart withdrew her motion but she said she believes they (standard conditions) should be looked at on a case by case basis. Mr. Troyer said Commissioner Munoz' motion remains in place with the request for a second. Commissioner Wimberly seconded Vice Chairman Munoz' motion. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of General Plan amendment DRC2008-00160 and Terra Vista Community Plan amendment DRC2008-00161 to be forwarded to the City Council for final action with a request to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Additionally, the Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18797 and Conditional Use Permit and Design Review DRC2008-00163 with the change in hours(condition 7 a&b,and 8 of the standard conditions, Section D-Shopping Centers) to reflect the hours of operation (including deliveries and store hours)from 7:00 a.m.- 11:00 p.m.as amended. The Commission approved Uniform Sign Program DRC2008-00451 by minute action. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY • NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2008-00204 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to construct Phase II of a master-planned recreational vehicle and self storage facility on 3.60 acres of land in the Open Space District in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of the eastbound 1-210 and southbound I-15 interchange - APN: 0228-011-38. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00048 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2007-00935. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT DRC2007-00935-CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES -A request to amend Section 5.24.300 (Open Space Districts) of Chapter 5 of Part II of the Etiwanda Specific Plan to add recreational vehicle and self storage facilities as a Conditionally Permitted Use in the Open Space District. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00048 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2008- 00204. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 24, 2008 Donald Granger, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Stewart commented that Mr. Granger prepared a great staff report, that she appreciates the clarity he provides and his presentation. She thanked him and congratulated him on a nice job. Vice Chairman Munoz referred to page G&H -195 of the agenda packet, condition#3. He said that he did not see a date that the sign program would be due. He said he would like to see some sort of milestone set, such as its submission prior to issuance of the grading permits. Chairman Fletcher asked what the concern is about. Commissioner Munoz said it is about timing. James Troyer, Planning Director, said that it would be reviewed by the DRC and the motion would have to be seconded and adopted as part of the project. He said vice Chairman Munoz is suggesting that it be prior to grading permits being issued. Charles Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, said the entire property is under one ownership. He noted the access from Victoria Street and that the architecture will mirror the upper portion of the development. He reported that no signage is proposed for Phase 2. He said it is important to respect the sign ordinance and it is important to work with businesses in these times. Mr. Troyer commented that no signs have been approved for Phase 1 and he said there are no signs for Phase 2 either. He asked if the proposal will be submitted for both phases at one time. Mr. Buquet said the original project is Phase 1 that was approved and the signage will have to be approved by the City. He said there is no signage proposed for Phase 2. He said it would be a permit, not a sign program. Commissioner Stewart asked if Phase 1 has an approved program. Mr. Buquet said no sign program is being presented and no signage for Phase 2 is contemplated and he questioned "reaching back" to a prior project. Vice Chairman Munoz said he wants to see a Sign Program for this project,the project was already approved and that the Commission wants the sign program to be presented before a certain milestone; and they would like to see something. Chairman Fletcher asked if there are any conditions in the approval for Phase 1 pertaining to this. Mr. Buquet said no and that the protocol is that it is typically part of the building permit process and that it is understood it is subject to approval by the City. Vice Chairman Munoz noted he is concerned they have not seen a sign program for Phase 1 or 2 and the concern is because he does not know what will go there. Mr. Buquet said any signage proposed would be part of Phase 1. Vice Chairman Munoz replied that is what they are referring to. Mr. Buquet reiterated that he knows it needs to go through the approval process. He said he is concerned that he heard mention of a condition for a sign program be submitted prior to grading, but there is no signage contemplated for Phase 2. • Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 24, 2008 Chairman Fletcher replied that it is a non-issue. Vice Chairman Munoz asked staff how we can accomplish that without violating codification. Chairman Fletcher said this application is for Phase 2 and he questioned how the Commission could go back to the prior approvals for a prior phase. He said that since no signage was submitted then, he has no objection to signage. Vice Chairman Munoz said he is commenting on conditions that exist today in the agreement. Mr. Buquet responded that signage can be proposed for any project anytime or additional signage after the approvals. Chairman Fletcher asked that if he has no signage, then does he have a problem with the proposed amended language. Mr. Troyer said the conditions call for a detailed Sign Program to be reviewed by the DRC. He said that if there are no signs then there is an unnecessary condition on the project. Mr. Buquet asked that the condition not be modified, and not tie it to a grading permit if it does not apply to this phase. Vice Chairman Munoz said it is then a "catch 22" in that the other phase is already approved. He asked then if there would be no sign program to be approved for this project (as a whole). Commissioner Stewart asked if they are bringing back a sign program for Phase 1. Mr. Buquet said yes. Commissioner Stewart asked if there is a timeline. Mr. Buquet said no. He said the market is frustrating right now. Vice Chairman Munoz asked if he has a problem giving the Commission a timeline for the sign program. Mr. Buquet said they are talking about Phase 1 which is already approved and not under consideration this evening. He said Phase 2 has nothing to do with Phase 1. He said if Phase 1 wants signage they will have to come in and he does not have a timeline for that. Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director, read from Exhibit J - the DRC action comments dated August 19, 2008,which noted that all signs shall meet the City's Sign Ordinance requirements and that the project was recommended for approval by the DRC "with the understanding that the applicant will return to the Design Review Committee at a future date to present a detailed sign package for review and approval. The applicant agreed to present a sign package to the Committee." Mr. Buquet said that is correct, for Phase 1 and at the time that comes in, but he has no timeline. Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing and seeing none, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wimberly noted that the project is a good use for that land parcel and that it has been vacant with "no other takers" for some time. He said it offers the possibility of living close to commercial uses and services and that he looks forward to seeing the development. Planning Commission Minutes -10- September 24, 2008 Commissioner Howdyshell said it is what you can do with that space. She said this development fills a need for the community, residential development there would not be good there and this development is a good idea. Commissioner Stewart commented that the development is compatible but she noted the issue with the sign program. She remarked that she was unsure what they could do for Phase 2 that would make it happen for Phase 1. She said condition #3 is ok without the amendment. She said the developer will have to come back, that no signs have been approved at this point and something has to come back. She said they need direction on that. Mr. Granger remarked that the concerns have been heard, that it is a high profile location. He said that the normal procedure would be for the applicant to submit a sign permit application for staff level review because it is not a uniform sign program, but that with all new applications being submitted now, would be submitted for review to the DRC along with the rest of the project. He suggested that for the minutes/official record,when a sign permit package is submitted it should not stay at staff level but be forwarded to the DRC for review and approval. He said this way it will not just be an administrative action and that it can be isolated from the approvals tonight. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, noted the concerns of limiting the approvals this evening to Phase 2. He said the project(Phase 1 and 2) is essentially all one project and that it was approved as a master plan and therefore a single project (the whole of the project in CEQA terms). He said the Commission could take staffs recommendation and bring the signage for the entire site back to DRC for both Phase 1 and Phase 2. Chairman Fletcher asked if there would be a timeline attached. Mr. Troyer suggested the package be reviewed by the DRC within 30 days of its submission. Vice Chairman Munoz said that would be ok. Chairman Fletcher reopened the public hearing. Mr. Buquet said irrespective of the master plan, this project was approved under the old sign criteria which was to file an application for a sign permit. He said that is how Phase 1 was approved and now we are on Phase 2. He asked for clarification of when the review would occur if he meant 30 days from submission it would be reviewed or if the City wants to review it 30 days from now. Mr. Troyer said we would want to review it within 30 days of its submission to allow for a timely review. Mr. Flower noted that is for the applicant's benefit. Commissioner Stewart said that it seems reasonable. Mr. Buquet said "we• are majoring in minors." He said his client's priority is getting design/construction plans through Phase 1 and Phase 2 is not on the radar right now and at the appropriate time they will bring that in and they should not have to go through some extraordinary process. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Munoz concurred that the project is an appropriate use of the land and probably the best suited project for the site. He said that the developer put much work into the design, including photometric studies. He said it is a good project, signage notwithstanding. Planning Commission Minutes -11- September 24, 2008 • Chairman Fletcher agreed that it is a good location for the use and that self storage is needed in this part of the City, convenient, close, and a great location. He said he is confused about the signage and that it is a non-issue at this time, that when the sign package is ready, they will have to get it approved. He said he favors the project as it stands. Vice Chairman Munoz asked legal counsel for clarification on the timing, specifically noting page G & H - 195, condition #3. Mr. Flower said he did not hear a motion to change the condition. Chairman Fletcher reiterated that it is a non-issue, there is no signage on Phase 2 and when they are ready to come in with signage on Phase 1, it will have to be approved. Mr. Flower said it is a non-issue. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Howdyshell, to make no changes to the conditions of approval, adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and recommend approval of the Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2007-00935 to be forwarded to the City Council for final action and approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2008-00204 by adoption of the resolutions. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried x x x x x I. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR) DRC2008-00381 FOR VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENTS (AMENDING THE VICTORIA GARDENS MASTER PLAN AND VICTORIA ARBORS MASTER PLAN) DRC2008-00383, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC 2008-00384, AND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA01-02) DRC2008-00385 — FOREST CITY COMMERCIAL-An opportunity to give public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in an SEIR for a potential build out proposal for the Victoria Gardens Regional Mixed Use Lifestyle Center, located in the eastern portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga bordered by Foothill Boulevard to the south, Base Line Road to the north, Day Creek Boulevard to the west, and Interstate 1-15 to the east. Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director, presented the staff report: Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. No one from the public made any comment. Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Chairman Fletcher asked if the Commission wanted to comment. Vice Chairman Munoz said it is his understanding that they are here to hear the comments and not to make them. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney stated that the Commissioners are free to comment on the initial study and if they think there are other environmental impacts that they think should be studied as part of the Supplemental EIR. Chairman Fletcher said they have looked at various alternatives and whether the development be mid or high rise, he thought the skyline view from the freeway would look appealing. He said the development at the Gardens has been a work in progress. He said he would like to see how the Planning Commission Minutes -12- September 24, 2008 new development would affect traffic, air quality, and parking restrictions as opposed to the existing alternate uses might provide. Commissioner Howdyshell suggested the standard elements be considered such as traffic, noise and parking during peak times. Commissioner Wimberly concurred with all that the other Commissioners had said and added the ingress and egress to freeways, traffic flows and safety conditions associated with that. Commissioner Stewart suggested the topic of public safety, that she did not see anything provided in the SEIR for fire safety related to high rise development. She added water service, traffic, noise, parking, internal circulation and law enforcement. She said that it will be like a separate City built out there and that healthcare facilities should be considered. Vice Chairman Munoz concurred with the prior comments and mentioned connectivity between the peripheral uses and the internal uses at the mall. He mentioned walking and livability for the people that live there. He said it would be good for the people living there to walk out of their apartment and enter into a streetscape. Chairman Fletcher suggested the minutes of the Joint Council/Commission meeting (2006) be forwarded to the consultant that referred to the proposed development. He said they should look at more open green grass and park areas. The secretary noted the Commissions comments to be forwarded to the consultant. Motion: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Stewart, to forward the comments to the environmental consultant. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS J. DEVELOPMENT CODE INTERPRETATION-DRC2008-00746-A request for an interpretation from the Planning Commission regarding the definition of setbacks for flag lots per Development Code Section 17.02.140, Definitions. Adam Collier, Planning Technician, presented the staff report and asked the Commission to approve the resolution. Chairman Fletcher commented that they are happy to assist in preventing lots from being unbuildable. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell,to adopt the Resolution for DRC2008-00746 approving and clarifying the definition/interpretation of the Development Code, Section 17.02.140 regarding flag lot setbacks. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried Planning Commission Minutes -13- September 24, 2008 COMMISSION BUSINESS/COMMENTS The Commission had no further business or comment. x w w x ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Stewart, carried 5-0, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, elArr James R. Troyer, AICP Secretary Approved: October 8, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes -14- September 24, 2008