Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/10/25 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting October 25, 2006 Chairman Stewart called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Stewart then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Rich Macias, Cristine McPhail, Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart • ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kevin Ennis, City Attorney, James Troyer, Planning Director; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Donald Granger, Associate Planner; Doug Fenn, Associate Planner; Emily Cameron, Associate Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Assistant Planner; Lou LeBlanc, Assistant Planner; Barbara Tuncay, Planning Department Secretary; Rebecca Coleman, Office Specialist II. . . . . . ANNOUNCEMENTS James Troyer, Planning Director, announced that item B on the consent calendar will be pulled and opened as a public hearing because of changes to the Engineering Department conditions. Chairman Stewart inquired if item B needed to be opened as a public hearing or not. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, explained that the Commission can act on item B after it has addressed item A and C of the Consent Calendar. . . . . . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by Munoz, carried (4-0-1) (Macias abstain), to approve the minutes of October 11, 2006. . . . . CONSENT CALENDAR A. VACATION OF LA GRANDE STREET EXCESS RIGHT-OF-WAY (V-205)— BRIAN/DAWN MURPHY AND BRUCE ALVAREZ—A Request to vacate a 60 foot wide excess portion of La Grande Street located at the southwest corner of Cameo Street and the City of Upland. C. HILLSIDE DESIGN REVIEW- DRC2006-00103-FRANK SALHAB -A request to construct a two story 9,991 square foot home on a 36,463 square foot lot in the Very Low Residential District(.1-2 dwelling units per acre); located at 10458 Hidden Farm Road -APN: 1074-121 . 16. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt . from the requirements of the-California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's. CEQA ;Guidelines.. The project qualifies as a Class 3 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, Subsection A,which covers the construction of a limited number of new structures. This includes the construction of one single-family residence in a residential zone. Because the project only proposes the construction of a single home in an established residential zoned neighborhood, staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. . • • Motion:. Moved by McPhail, seconded by Macias to adopt items A and C of the. Consent Calendar, Resolution 06-91 as presented. Motion carried by the following vote: . AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART. .. • . NOES: . NONE ABSENT: - carried • . B. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00382 - K. HOVNANIAN( FORECAST HOMES AT RANCHO ETIWANDA, LLC)-Proposed 97 detached single-family homes on 34.1 acres in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located north of Day Creek Boulevard- APN: 0225-071-48 and 50. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16226-1. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #88082915 and #98121091 certified by the City Council on August 1, 2001) and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in that Environmental Impact Report. Commissioner McPhail stated that she must recuse herself because her company receives remuneration from this applicant. . Dan James, Senior Engineer, explained that the Standard Conditions that were originally inserted into the staff report and resolution are related to this project, but are for a future timeframe in the development process but the correct Standard Conditions have now been inserted in their place and in no way change the intent of the project development. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher to adopt Consent Calendar item B, Resolution 06-91 with the corrections presented. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: McPHAIL - carried PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00381 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - The development of a 136 room hotel, including a bar, totaling 67,503 square feet on 2.92 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6) within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Center Avenue -APN: 0210-391-21. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17303 and Development Review and Master Plan DRC2005-00458. This action includes approval of an Addendum to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration by the Planning Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 25, 2006 Commission on November 9, 2005, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Section 15164. Donald Granger, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if the original Design Review application was for 136 rooms but the Negative Declaration was for 113 rooms. Mr. Granger replied that that was correct. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if the developer was trying to "squeeze in"additional rooms into the building after it was approved. Mr. Granger replied that the developer is adding an additional 23 rooms, but the additions were assessed in the addendum from the Environmental Evaluation and from a site planning perspective it was assessed in the supplemental parking study, but that it is correct that there is an addition and even a "squeezing in"of 23 rooms but they have looked at the impact to make sure that it could be absorbed. Commissioner Munoz asked if the uniform sign program was addressed in areas other than the upper end of the building. Mr. Granger asked Commissioner Munoz is he was referring to the monument sign at the entrance. Commissioner Munoz replied that is what he was referring to. Mr. Granger replied that this is what that specific condition was for; that the placement and the quality and the size of the sign would adhere to that condition. Commissioner Munoz asked if that would adhere to the 150 square foot rule. Mr. Granger responded that the monument sign square footage is less than the 150 square foot rule, and that the 150 foot rule pertains to the wall sign. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395 introduced himself as the applicants representative and stated that they are proud of the fact that they have selected Rancho Cucamonga as their entry into the California market. He said that the 113 room hotel was initially from their master plan and at that time they had a hotel user that was their model as far as room count, so when the Environmental Assessment was done for the Initial Master Plan that was the number that was used. He added that since the change in the room count,they had to update the Environmental Assessment and take into account the additional rooms and see what affect it would have against the Master Plan and original approval. He added that it has gone through the full Environmental Assessment Review as is required per CEQA and the City's requirements. He stated that Walker Parking provided a supplemental traffic analysis and indicated that the additional room count would not be adversely affected. Mr. Buquet acknowledged the time and energy that the Commission and City staff have put into this project and stated that it was very much appreciated. He added that he felt that this will be a "Flagship" location and that they are looking into developing another W A Loft Hotel in the Phoenix area. He added that they have reviewed the staff report and standard conditions and are in full concurrence with them. He added that they are joined there tonight by two representatives from John Balk Hospitality Group who are the "management arm"of the W Aloft hotel entry into California and they are Mr. Paul Novak and John Dendress. Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 25, 2006 Pam Stewart asked-if either Mr. Novak or Mr. Dendress would like to address the Commission. • Paul Novak, 1 North Wacker Drive, Chicago Illinois, stated that he is in charge of their hospitality department which is focused on developing strictly W Aloft Hotels for Starwood as a preferred developer. He added that they are very excited about coming to Rancho Cucamonga and felt that there is a superb market here and felt that the Haven Park project offers exactly what his product was designed for and is committed to it. He added that currently they have five projects in development around the United States and their focus is purely on the W A loft product. He stated. that they have enjoyed working with the City staff and the Design Committee and they really look forward to having this project approved and they expect the Grand Opening to occur sometime in early 2008. Commissioner McPhail asked for clarification from the Design Review Committee as to what the most recent changes were to the project. Mr. Granger explained that at the second Design Review meeting the applicant came in with revised drawings and the Design Review Committee was substantially satisfied and recommended approval, but was subject to three items;1) to extend the aluminum skin on the east and south elevations 2) to add a vertical element or a pop-out feature on the north elevation which should be approximately 12 to 18 inches and 3) make sure that the wall sign at the top of the east elevation was compliant with the maximum 150 square feet of area, which was redesigned. Commissioner Munoz asked for clarification on the sign and stated that he was looking back at the Design Review comments where it stated that the project has two wall signs that are approximately 190 square feet each. He noted that there had been changes on the sign at the top of the building, but not on the Porte Cochere. Mr. Granger replied that the size of sign at the Porte Cochere would have to be verified in plan ' check because they had not verified the dimensions, and added that was an excellent clarification. Commissioner McPhail stated that that issue could be remedied with a condition of approval. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, stated that there is a condition of approval on wall signs complying with the sign standards in the Municipal Code seen on page D sixty-six, Planning Condition six, and asked if that condition was sufficient to cover this issue. Mr. Granger answered that it would be sufficient to cover this issue. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked that since this project is new to the west coast,was there significance to the name or the design of the sign. Mr. Granger replied that part of the hotel's name is from the architectural inspiration of a loft style room accenting the amount of window space they have, which is above average. Mr. Novak stated that the A loft name comes from the concept of a loft room which has more glass and higher ceilings typically whereas a standard hotel room is about 7 ''A to 8 feet tall and these rooms are all nine feet tall. He added that the public space is all open with fourteen foot high exposed ceilings which gives one a feeling of volume and significant height. He added that the"A" as part of the Aloft name, is a play off the parent brand which is the Starwood W Hotel concept, which has been a phenomenally successful hotel/boutique hotel brand developing around the Country and its reference is "W" and they just basically went to the other end of the alphabet to attach it to "Loft". ' Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 25, 2006 Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, to adopt Resolution 06-93 to approve the Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00381 as presented by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: - carried f R R k E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18033 - WEINBERGER - A request to subdivide 9.9 acres of land into 13 lots in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre), located south of Banyan Street and east of East Avenue - APN: 0225-191-09 and 17. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2006- 00309. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Diaz, Senior Planner gave the staff report and mentioned that no comments from the public were received regarding the project proposal. Louis LeBlanc, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Stewart added that this item does have a Tree Removal Permit with it,which she failed to mention earlier. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing. Robert Weinberger, 1407 High Bluff Drive, Newport, stated that this is his first development and felt he chose a great project. He stated that he grew up in the City of Upland and that he is not new to the Inland Empire. He added that he is please to have the honor of presenting this Tentative Tract ' Map to the Planning Commission. He explained that the proposed project has 13 lots and an orientation so that the rears of the homes have views of the mountains and they put a back to back cul-de-sac configuration to maximize privacy among the homeowners and to also eliminate cut-through traffic for the schools that are in the surrounding area, which was a major concern. He went on to say that the project has very deep lots which hopefully will encourage equestrian owners, due to the fact that they can put corrals at the very back of their properties and not have them close to their residences. He added that they moved the corals down from the rears of the properties to accommodate future development of surrounding properties and added a cul-de-sac design which would allow for the development of the Christmas Tree Farm to the south of the project and to the north they have shown a Master Plan of a cul-de-sac that would accommodate nine homes on that 5.7 acre lot. He added that there is an Historic house on the north/west corner and they have been trying to work hard with the neighbors, due to the fact that this is an infill project, which requires being able to work with the neighbors so that it has a minimal impact on them. He added that in regard to the home on the north/west corner, they agreed to put up a block wall on the side of their homes that would allow for more privacy from the people utilizing the equestrian trail. He noted that the property to the south which was the Christmas Tree lot, is only there 6 months out of the year, but to accommodate them in future development they only built half the street, plus ten and a little bit more than that to accommodate their future development. He added that tract 17651 is a much bigger development with 56 homes and over 40 acres and requires more engineering than his project,which was reason for the phasing of the project. He asked the Commission to refer to page 2 of the staff report where it states " The applicant indicated that their intent is to record and build the project in two phases; one for each cul-de-sac. The westerly cul-de-sac would be the first phase. The easterly cul-de-sac would be the last phase because of the amount of off-site improvements needed particularly a storm drain, and coordination with the adjoining developer of Tentative Tract 17651". He added than when he acquired the property, it was important for him to have the assurance that he could develop the property due to the fact that it had immediate access off of East Avenue. He stated that he was aware that he would need access from a future street in Planning Commission Minutes -5- October 25, 2006 order to develop tract 17651 on the other cul-de-sac. He stated that he wanted to thank the City's Planning Department including Dan Coleman and Louis LeBlanc and he also thanked the Engineering Department, including Dan James and Cam Amos. He went on to say that unfortunately he had bad news and that he must ask for a Continuance due to the fact that there was a misunderstanding between himself and the Engineering Department. He explained that the Planning Department was onboard with the two cul-de-sac design and phasing them into separate recordings; however with Engineering there was miscommunication between himself and the department so that they did not write conditions for phasing of the project. He explained that everything slopes to the south/east of the property and everything is draining to the two cul-de-sacs instead of what is required which is for the zoning to be drained into the Victoria Basin which is about one '% mile away, below the 210 freeway. He added that at this point , he did not have a condition from the Engineering Department to construct a storm drainage facility to accommodate the "X"street cul-de-sac, but Dan James has worked very closely with him in the last week as soon as they notified him of this discrepancy and we've agreed to ask for a Continuance from the Commission to allow us to go back and work out an interim solution that does not require him to put a storm drain from the south/east part of his property, all the way down to the Victoria Basin prior to Tract 17651 being developed. He stated that what he was asking for was an interim facility that allows him to drain from"X"street to the south/east to his undeveloped portion of the property as an interim basis until Tract 17651 is recorded and constructed. He noted that the Engineering Departments thinks it could be a one year process or longer and again he stated that he was in a position where he can develop his"X"street cul-de-sac today with the permission with Engineering to allow for the interim drainage facility and would like a Continuance until the next meeting of November 8, 2006. Chairman Stewart explained that this item is no longer in front of the Commission for approval, but instead the applicant is asking for a Continuance to the November 8, 2006 meeting and asked if there was anyone in the audience not able to attend the November 8 meeting who would like to speak either for or against the project. Vanessa Smith, 6155 East Avenue, stated that she was very pleased with the way Mr.Weinberger has worked with the neighbors and had every confidence that he will build high quality homes that will enhance the community and was in favor of this project moving forward. Chairman Stewart closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked for clarification from the Engineering Department if the application was incomplete or inconsistent or if it was just a conflict with engineering requirements for drainage. Dan James, Senior Engineer, replied that as Mr. Weinberger stated, there was some miscommunication, but that Mr.Weinberger did originally come in with the presentation of the phase development and his tentative map listed phase 1 and phase 2 and there was some comments from engineering regarding the drainage, then as shown in the exhibit for the tentative map, it no longer has the words "Phase one or Phase two", so we were under the impression that he was getting away from the phasing, waiting for the development from the east to continue ahead of his overall project and therefore we did not address the phase issue. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if an interim drainage facility was something engineering would be able to do. Mr. James replied that they have to wait and see what Mr. Weinberger is proposing so they can appropriately address the Conditions of Approval and that Mr. Weinberger does have an engineer, who has a proposal, but the plans submitted with the package tonight do not show that proposal; it only shows one tentative map. Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 25, 2006 Vice Chairman Fletcher clarified that the Commission will continue this item and when they get more information on the project, they will consider it then. Mr. James replied that that was correct. Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by Macias, to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract map SUBTT18033 to the November 8, 2006, Planning Commission meeting: Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: - carried F. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM17938 - ROCK PITT, LLC. - A request to subdivide a 3.13 acre parcel into 8 lots and one lettered lot for common areas within the Industrial Park (Subarea 12) zoning district, located at the southeast corner of 5th Street and Pittsburgh Avenue - APN: 0229-263-73. Related file: DRC2006-00262. This project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. G. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW- DRC2006-00262- ROCK PITT, LLC-A request to develop four single-story office buildings, and four two-story office buildings totaling 52,250 square feet on a 3.13 acre parcel in the Industrial Park (Subarea 12) zoning district, located at the southeast corner of Pittsburgh Avenue and 5th Street - APN: 0229-263-73. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17938. This project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions. Louis LeBlanc, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant was present. Greg Korth, 4 Park Plaza, Irvine, introduced himself as the applicant and stated that this is his company's first project on the west coast. He stated that he would like to thank the excellent cooperation they have had with the Planning Department, including Dan Coleman, Louis LeBlanc and Mark Brawthen in the Engineering Department, as well as the assistance they have received from the Design Review Committee prior to tonight's meeting. He added that they are seeking the approval for the Pittsburgh Office Park which is an eight building office project; with 4 single-story and 4 two-story units, primarily for servicing the growing population of independent career professionals residing in Rancho Cucamonga and surrounding communities. He added that the average building size is 7,000 square feet for a total project size of 52,250 square feet. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if the offices are designed as "single user" units. Mr. Korth replied that they were. Chairman Stewart closed the public hearing. Commissioner McPhail stated that this was basically a straightforward project and that she appreciated the applicants efforts and when they came to design review they discussed things and really moved forward with what was suggested to them and the Commission appreciates when applicants do that and stated that she thinks it's going to be a lovely project and moved approval. Chairman Stewart stated that she concurred with Commissioner McPhail. Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 25, 2006 Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by Munoz, to adopt Resolution 06-95 and 6-96 and Conditions to approve the Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17938 and Development Review DRC2006-00262 as presented by staff. Motion'carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: - carried H. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16884 - BLU CROIX, LTD (on behalf of Verizon California) -A request to subdivide a parcel of 0.86 acre into four parcels, three of which will be sold for future residential development, and the other which will remain in ownership with Verizon for continued use as a telephonic switching facility, located in the Low Residential District(2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) at 6433 Puma Place-APN: 0225-271-49. This action is categorically exempt per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines'Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions. Mike Smith, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Munoz asked if the proposal to resolve the issues are satisfactory to staff. Mike Smith replied yes based on their conference before the meeting he believed they could be incorporated in as Conditions of Approval and staff would verify that they are to the satisfaction of the City's requirements as well as to Mr. Caro. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant was present. Patrick Martin, 6040 Sadring Avenue, Woodland Hills introduced himself as the applicant's representative and stated that he is with the firm "Blue Croix Limited" and has been under the guidance of the Planning Department and the Engineering Department to help make his application as smooth as possible and they were there to answer any questions. Raul Caro, 6419 Para Place, Rancho Cucamonga stated that he is the applicant and thanked Mike Smith for allowing him to meet with the Verizon representative before the meeting and felt that they were able to work out a solution to the drainage problem. He stated that his property drains into the Verizon property, but the drainage line had been accidentally cut by Verizon which he has been telling them that for the past year and one%and he thought they were finally going to get a solution on that issue, as well as, the paving of the driveway which is not only a dust issue, but a weed problem. He added that in speaking with some of his neighbors on Cougar street, as well as himself, they are concerned that subdividing that lot to allow three future home sites is not really compatible with the existing homes that are on Cougar street or on Bobcat Street. Mr. Caro added that they are concerned that the future homes will not be the high quality homes that are there now and will be detrimental to their property value and tax base for the City and furthermore they are concerned that the 3 home sites will create congested parking on that street. He stated that there has already been a small neighborhood squabble in regard to who is parking where. Mr. Caro added that it's also not unusual to see two or 3 Verizon vehicles parked in the driveway as well as on the street. He stated that he wanted to thank the Verizon representative for addressing these issues and that he and his neighbors welcome the development of that lot but that the addition of three homes is kind of squeezing it and not keeping with the high quality homes that the Planning Commission of Rancho Cucamonga wants to see North of the 210 Freeway in Rancho Cucamonga. Chairman Stewart asked if Mr. Caro's home was adjacent to the driveway in which he is talking about. Mr. Caro replied that he is. Planning Commission Minutes -8- October 25, 2006 Chairman Stewart stated that she had driven by the area and felt that it is a very unique set up out there. Mr. Martin stated he wanted to address Mr. Caro's concerns and work with him as well as the neighborhood and that Verizon is amiable to take care of the drainage and repair the pipe which was apparently split or broken and Verizon does want to correct that issue. He added that Mr. Caro's second issue was paving of the driveway from Puma Place back to the Verizon building due to the dust issue and Verizon is willing to pave the driveway which would solve those concerns. Also, his concern with the size of the lots and his lot being a little bit bigger, he believed on average the lots might be about 8,000 square feet and they have looked at the Zoning designation and the size of the lots and their proposal is consistent with the City's standards. He stated that one further note is that this proposal is only for a subdivision and not for development; he added that Verizon is not a developer and they are not developing these lots at all, so the size of the homes would have to be addressed with the future developer of the homes. Mike Smith stated that when Mr. Caro came to the Planning Department staff to look at the surrounding properties in their computer database, they determined that some of the properties were indeed much larger than 8,000 square feet, some were around 11,000 square feet, but that there was a balance of remaining properties, mostly around Puma Street that were mostly around 7,700 square feet, so on average those lots would be 8, 000 square feet. Chairman Stewart closed the public hearing. Kevin Ennis,Assistant City Attorney, explained that the Commission might want to get some more specificity from staff on the drainage pipe issue in terms of what is required and what the condition would provide. Mike Smith replied that the problem is a 4 inch drainage pipe that connects to the applicant's property and goes through an easement that's there along the south side of the property and then it follows parallel to the sound wall at the Freeway and connects to Milliken Avenue. He added that it was cracked because of Verizon vehicles driving over it and was never repaired and the water from Mr. Caro's property drains onto the Verizon property rather than draining correctly onto Milliken Avenue. So what Mr. Caro is asking for and what Verizon has indicated is that they would rectify the pipe so that the flow that was supposed to go out to Milliken Avenue will be restored. He added that as far as the paving of the driveway, the new pipe will go below the asphalt so that damage to the pipe will not occur again. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked in what time frame the corrections will have to be made. Jim Tousignant,Verizon Real Estate Manager for the west region, explained that Verizon is planning on making the improvements within the next 12 months, but is agreeable to whatever time Frame the Commission deems appropriate, but that it would not be practical to fix the pipe first, that it should be done in conjunction with the asphalt in order to protect the new pipe from being damaged again and so whatever time frame the Commission imposes, they should be for both, the pipe and the driveway and Verizon would also be agreeable to a time frame placed on the condition if that is the Commission's desire. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked Mr. Tousignant if the repairs could be done in six months. Mr.Tousignant replied that it really depends on the engineering off it and what they come across as far as the condition of the pipe going out to Milliken Avenue because one of the neighbors indicated that the pipe may be damaged in more than one area and if that is the case, it may take longer, but if nothing unforeseen comes up, Verizon thinks six months will probably be okay. Planning Commission Minutes -9- October 25, 2006 Chairman Stewart asked the Assistant City Attorney for clarification on what would be included in the added conditions. Kevin Ennis explained that that the first condition would be that the pipe shall be repaired or replaced as required and as approved by staff and to be done in conjunction with the paving of an asphalt driveway from Cougar Street to the Verizon building and that all of that work is to be completed no later than 12 months and subject to appropriate permits and other approvals; which must be done prior to recordation of the Map. Mike Smith stated that the applicant wanted to record the map within two months and if he would be able to that before these items were fixed. - James Troyer, Planning Director, stated that Verizon has 12 months to •complete these improvements and if they record the map further out,then the improvements have to be made when the map is recorded. Chairman Stewart added that this time frame just gives the City added protection that these issues will be fixed. Kevin Ennis explained that if they wanted to record the map before the conditions were satisfied, they would have to bond for it and enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement to ensure that that occurred. Mr. Caro emphasized to the Commission that before they approve this,they should really look at the size of these homes and at 8, 000 square feet a piece;they are truly not compatible with the existing homes on that cul-de-sac or the other cul-de-sac for that matter. Commissioner Munoz added that he looked at an aerial of a dozen or so surrounding homes in that area and felt that the even though there are some that are bigger, for the most part the dozen homes that surround those three lots are pretty consistent with the size that is being proposed. Chairman Stewart stated that she concurred with Commissioner Munoz and stated that she went out there herself and did not find that the lots proposed to be an exception to the average to what's out there now and that every track had some homes that are a little bit larger or a little bit smaller, but felt that its very compatible and that Mr. Caro's point is very well taken, but she thought the lots are compatible with what is in that neighborhood. She added that she thought that Verizon was a pre- existing condition and the driveway was there and they had a good look as to what their neighbor was going to be and the potential that that lot might come up for development, so she thought that Verizon and the Commission, alohg with staff are putting enough conditions with this proposal that the Mr. Caro will get some remedy to his concerns, but she believed that this partial split as being suggested is very compatible with that neighborhood. Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, to adopt Resolution 06-97 with the two added conditions to approve the Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16884 as presented by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: - carried . .. . I. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM1 7836-WILLIAM FOX GROUP-A request to subdivide 2.2 acres of land into 4 parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14), located on the west side of Hyssop Drive, north of 6th Street-APN: 0229-271-31, 32 and 37. Related File: Planning Commission Minutes -10- October 25, 2006 Development Review DRC2006-00005. This project is categorically exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State guidelines Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions as well as the City's CEQA Guidelines. J. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2005-00005 - WILLIAM FOX GROUP - A request to construct 4 industrial buildings totaling 88,076 square feet on 2.2 acres in the General Industrial District(Subarea 14), located on the west side of Hyssop Drive, north of 6th Street- APN: 0229-271-31, 32, and 37. Related File Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17836. This project is categorically exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to State CEQA guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects as well as the City's CEQA Guidelines. At 8:20 p.m. Chairman Stewart called a short recess to dismiss the students in attendance. Doug Fenn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and explained that there was an error in the staff report as well as the resolution stating the square footage of the buildings were 88,000 square feet, but in fact they were 36,625 square feet in total. Chairmen Stewart asked if they would need to do an amendment to change the square footage to the correct amount. Doug Fenn replied that they will replace the 88,000 square feet with 36,625 square feet in the staff report and the resolutions. Ruben Warren, Project Manager with the William Fox Group, stated that it has been a pleasure working with staff and Dan Coleman, with whom he met in late 2005 and shared with him their proposed site plan and elevations and at that time Mr. Coleman provided comments related to cornice enhancements as well as additional glass near the office areas which they willfully incorporated his suggestions. He added that earlier this year,the applications were filed and since then he and Doug Fenn have worked diligently on additional enhancements including the arch canopies on the entrances and more recently they worked through additional screen wall,decorative paving, overhead trellises and more importantly, more creative landscaping. He stated that they truly look forward to the construction of this project and are actually developing the property to the north and well under construction with a 103,000 square foot tilt up building and are currently in negotiations with a national retailer who is new to the Southern California market. He stated that the map before the Commission is basically for the purpose that these buildings will be put up for sale or lease, so the division has to take place. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, noted that there is another change needed to the other resolution in regard to the square footage in the tile of the resolution. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, added that the site plans state that the square footage is 37,140 gross floor areas. Chairman Stewart asked for clarification on the square footage from the applicant. Ruben Warren stated that the correct square footage is 37,140, which was indicated on the site plans. Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by Munoz,to adopt Resolution 06-98 and with the changes to the square footage mentioned in the meeting to approve the Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17836 and Development Review DRC2006-00005 as presented by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -11- October 25, 2006 AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART - NOES: NONE ABSENT: - carried, DIRECTOR'S REPORTS • K. PROGRESS REPORT ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2004-01173-JACK HALL-A report on the progress of fulfilling the conditions of approval for converting an existing historic home into an office on 1.4 gross acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 6710 Beryl Street-APN: 0202-461-65. PROGRESS REPORT ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-45 AND ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 91-03-MARGARITA BEACH Report was received and filed. PUBLIC COMMENTS None COMMISSION BUSINESS L. DISCUSSION REGARDING AGENDA HEADING TITLES. James R. Troyer, Planning Director, brought up for discussion the title of the area on the Agenda that reads"Commission Business"and felt that it needed to be changed to Commission Comments or something similar and asked for suggestions from the Commission. Vice Chairman, Fletcher suggested they call it Commissioner Business/Comments. Chairman Stewart concurred with Vice Chairman Fletcher. Commission agreed that the title on the agenda would be changed to read "Commissioner Business/Comments". Commissioner Fletcher, made another suggestiorr that it might be a good idea that since the City is 90 percent built out, that he and the rest of the Commissioner's should have a map of the City, to show where the remaining 10 percent of open land was located. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, replied that there is a map already in existence and each of the commissioners would receive a map of the remaining open land. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, carried 5-0-, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:33 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -12- October 25, 2006 Respectfully submitted, J es R. royer,IAIC 0 cretary. Approved: November 8, 2006 • • Planning Commission Minutes -13- October 25, 2006