Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/03/26 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 26, 2003 Chairman McNiel 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 Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: Rich Macias STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, Kirt Coury, Associate Planner, Linda Daniels, Redevelopment Agency Director; Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner; Debra Meier, Associate Planner; Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner; Jan Reynolds, Redevelopment Agency Analyst; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary;Alan Warren, Associate Planner; Emily Wimer,Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, reported staff had received a request from the applicant to continue Items A, B, D, and E to April 23, 2003. He also stated Item C should be pulled from the Consent Calendar to be taken with Item N. Chairman McNiel announced he is a new, first-time grandfather. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Stewart, carried 3-0-1-1 (Macias absent, McNiel abstain), to approve the minutes of March 12, 2003. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Stewart, carried 3-0-1-1 (Macias absent, McNiel abstain), to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of March 12, 2003. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00751 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-The development of four industrial buildings totaling 54,662 square feet on 4.86 acres of land in the General Industrial District(Subarea 13), located at the southeast corner and southwest corner of 6th Street and Charles Smith Avenue -APN: 229- 263-05 and 229-283-04 and 05. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16009. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00750 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-The development of five industrial buildings totaling 117,790 square feet on 7.4 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14), located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the 1-15 Freeway-APN: 229-283-08, 10, and 11. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16010. C. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00814-KB HOME-A design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 48 single-family lots on 37 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Banyan Street—APN: 0225-181-04, 06, 07, 08, and 43. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16116, Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00471, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00070. Chairman McNiel noted that all items were to be pulled from the Consent Calendar. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00751 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00750 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16009 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-The subdivision of 4.86 acres of land into 4 parcels in the General Industrial District(Subarea 13), located at the southeast corner and southwest comer of 6th Street and Charles Smith Avenue APN: 229-263-05 and 229-283-04 E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16010 - RKW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - The subdivision of 7.4 acres of land into 5 parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14), located at the southeast corner of 6th Street and the 1-15 Freeway - APN: 229-283-08, 10, and 11. Related file: Development Review DRC2002-00750. Chairman McNiel noted that the public hearing remained open from the previous meeting. There was no testimony. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Development Review DRC2002- 00751, Development Review DRC2002-00750,Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16009,and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16010 to April 23, 2003. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried C. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00814 - KB HOME N. APPEAL OF TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2003-00070 - KB HOME-An appeal of the City Planner approval of a Tree Removal Permit on 37 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre) in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Banyan Street—APN: 0225-181-04, 06, 07, 08, and 43. Related files: Development Review DRC2002-00814, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16116, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00471. Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 26, 2003 Kirt Coury, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Jim Souza, 13062 Cherokee Road, Rancho Cucamonga, presented a letter requesting a 30-day continuance or asking that the Commission refer the matter back to staff to begin the process again. He felt he had not had sufficient opportunity to evaluate and review the original grading plans and application, obtain an opinion from an independent arborist, or produce a biological report conceming the potential habitat of bird species in the tree. He indicated he received the staff report on March 21 for the March 26 meeting. He said a biologist visited the site earlier in the day and stated the trees are potential habitat for raptors and he recommended that a formal survey be done to see if there are any raptors present. He noted the biologist commented the nesting period is from March 1 through September and tree removal could jeopardize potential habitat. He said he was informed a survey could take up to 8 weeks. Chairman McNiel asked if Mr. Souza read the arborist's report. Mr. Souza responded affirmatively. Chairman McNiel noted the arborist report indicates the trees are not healthy. He asked if Mr.Souza would agree with that as a layperson. Mr. Souza replied he would agree that some are not healthy, but he felt some are healthy. Chairman McNiel asked if Mr. Souza is familiar with"Blue Gum" Eucalyptus trees and the brittleness of them. Mr. Souza responded negatively. Chairman McNiel stated they are a very brittle tree and he noted staff recommends they be replaced with "Spotted Gum Eucalyptus planted 8 feet on center. He said that is a much healthier tree that is not as brittle and is less of a fire hazard. He asked if Mr. Souza was aware the trees would be replaced. Mr. Souza confirmed he was aware they are to be replaced and he questioned the height of the replacement trees. Chairman McNiel stated the recommendation is for 15-gallon trees, which he estimated would be 5-10 feet tall initially and is a fairy fast growing tree. Mr. Souza stated he read the second arborist report and it appeared the premise for removal is not the maturity of the trees, but rather the grading. He asked why the grading couldn't be changed. Chairman McNiel said grading is needed to channel water properly. Mr. Souza stated he was asking for an extension because he did not understand the appeal process and he would like to have time to review things. He said he is for progress in the City and he thinks this is a wonderful development, but he wants to be sure due process is handled correctly. Commissioner Tolstoy gave a brief history of the planting of the Eucalyptus trees in Rancho Cucamonga. He stated the citrus farmers planted trees as wind protection for their groves in the late 1800s. He said that when the trees get over-mature, they oftentimes appear healthy but have a hollow trunk, which leads to the trees coming down in heavy winds. Commissioner Tolstoy noted there are houses in the path of those trees. He pointed out that the trees were not watered or fertilized after the groves were pulled out and the trees became unthrifty. He stated the Eucalyptus Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 26, 2003 tree borer has attacked those unhealthy trees and they are extremely dangerous. He was surprised the developer was willing to plant replacement trees at 8-feet on center and said that is very tight. He felt the new 15-gallon trees would be better for the adjacent houses. Mr. Souza asked that the Commission take due consideration of the wildlife that is just beginning their nesting period. Jary Cockroft, KBHome, 801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Pomona, stated that they agree with the conditions for the Development Review and the Tree Removal Permit. He indicated the trees in question are along the project's southern boundary. He noted there are residential lots to the south with a 10-foot wide horse trail adjoining the new project. He said they are required to widen the trail to 20 feet and most of the trees in question are located at the 10-foot line adjacent to and on the horse trail. He reported there is a berm that varies in height from 6-8 feet along the project's southern boundary with part of the berm being adjacent to the horse trail. He said the berm was placed up against the trees and in many instances the berm encroaches on the trees. He indicated that in order to construct their portion of the horse trail, they must tie into the present grade of the trail,which means the trees must be removed. He commented that after receiving the initial arborist report, they asked the arborist to again review the situation in an effort to avoid removing the trees. He reported the arborist said the roots of the trees have moved toward the surface of the berm in order to get air and water and removing the berm will destroy the viability of the trees. He noted the arborist's report declares the trees are in a state of decline and even if left in their present condition, the remaining life of the trees would only be 20-25 years. He said they would be willing to install the community trail without removing the trees if it were feasible but it would require widening the community trail form 20 feet to up to 40-50 feet. He noted that if the trail were widened to 50 feet, the lot sizes would no longer conform to City standards. He stated the engineer and arborist for the project were available to answer questions regarding the grading or trees. He said that after the tree removal permit was approved, they found out at the neighborhood meeting that them were concerns and they agreed to work with staff and allow the appeal to come to the Planning Commission even though the appeal period had passed. He noted that appeal was filed at the beginning of March and he felt that provided sufficient time for the appellant to obtain another arborist report or research whatever was needed in order to validate their position. He indicated they received written approval from nine of the surrounding homeowners for removal of the trees, but they were not able to get approval from Mr. Souza or Mr. Sessler. Patrick McGuire, 6192 East Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated his family moved to the area in 1903. He reported that originally there were Cypress trees in Etiwanda, but termites ate them. He said"Blue Gum"Eucalyptus trees fell down even when they were farming. He stated the Eucalyptus trees easily fall and are a terrible fire hazard. He questioned why anyone would go to the aggravation to try and save them. He thought all"Blue Gum" Eucalyptus trees should be removed. Jim Borer, Certified Arborist, 9364 Monarch Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he prepared the arborist, he said that the report needs to address two main issues, the existing condition of the trees and the anticipated impacts of the construction encroachment. He felt staff, Mr. Cockroft, and Commissioner Tolstoy had adequately stated the condition of the trees. He said grading to remove the berm will have an impact on the soil structure and the trees will suffer root loss. He explained the majority of the roots are within the top 12-24 inches of the soil, including the berm. He stated he lives in the older section of Alta Loma where there have been efforts to save the mature trees but he could count a few dozen Eucalyptus trees that have failed within just a few blocks of his home. Chairman McNiel asked Mr. Borer to evaluate the differences between the"Blue Gum" Eucalyptus and the "Spotted Gum" Eucalyptus. Mr. Borer replied that "Blue Gum" has an irregular branch pattern and many times has a multiple trunk structure, meaning two or three branches come out of the base of the tree, which makes the tree highly susceptible to fissuring. He said many times there are 18-24 inch diameter side branches Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 26, 2003 coming off the main stem and these branches are highly susceptible to falling off. He indicated there is even a phenomenon called summer branch drop, where the trees unexpectedly shed large branches. He noted that when a tree loses a large branch, it tears out part of the trunk, which exposes the trunk of the tree to decay. He reported that many of the larger branches have torn off from the trees in question. He stated the spotted gum trees have the same potential but they mature to about half the size, have a more dependable scaffold branch structure, and do not have multiple trunk structure as frequently. He indicated the nurseries train the trees to have a single stem. Commissioner Tolstoy stated a lot of the "Blue Gums"were grown in flats and have bent roots. Mr. Borer stated that almost all trees have their roots near the soil because they need water and air. Chairman McNiel asked Mr. Borer to comment on the recommended 15-gallon size of the replacement trees as opposed to 24-inch box trees. Mr. Borer stated that Eucalyptus do not do nearly as well from the larger containers. He said that Caltrans specifies 1-or 5-gallon trees for their plantings. He indicated that Caltrans has found that the fewer times a tree root circles in a container, the better eventual landscape tree. He noted that Caltrans is more concerned about the health of the tree in 50-75 years as opposed to in a year or two. Commissioner Stewart indicated she was curious if larger trees could be used, but it appeared that was not advisable. Mr. Borer stated that Caltrans had done studies with smaller trees up to the 24-inch box tree,and the smaller trees exceed the growth rates of the larger ones over time. He said the City even uses 5-gallon trees in other areas. Gus Gaglio, 6318 East Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated his property borders the south side of the project. He favored removing the Eucalyptus trees that border his property. He agreed that the trees can be unsafe and he felt that if any of the soil next to the trees is removed, it could be catastrophic. He stated they have enjoyed the trees and beauty for many years but he felt it was justified to remove them because they could cause a lot of damage. Mark Bertone, Madole and Associates, 10601 Church Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they prepared the grading plans for the project. He showed cross-sections of the current and proposed grading in the area of the trees. He stated the berms were put there 15-20 years ago and he believed they were installed as flood protection for the existing houses to the south because there had been some flood zone issues. He reported the tract was required to have the flood zone removed prior to approval of the tract, and the berm is no longer needed. He said that the existing grading on a portion of the existing trail does not conform to trail standards. He explained trails need a 2-5 percent gradient and it is now closer to 10 percent. Commissioner Tolstoy noted that the cross-section showed that some of the trunks of the trees are buried by the berm. Mr. Bertone confirmed that was correct. He stated the intent of the grading is to match the existing property to the south. He said the trail was then tilted northerly with a proposed concrete drainage swale on the north side of the trail, so the trail will drain out to East Avenue. He explained that if the trees remain, it would be necessary to shift the trail 20-30 feet north and encroach into the proposed lots. Sebastian Mamwati, 10730 Church Street, Rancho Cucamonga, asked how fast the replacement trees would mature in order to provide shade. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 26, 2003 Mr. Borer indicated that the trees would grow to about 25 feet in 5 years and 35-40 feet in 10 years. Chairman McNiel stated it is fairly rapid growth and still retains the windrow flavor. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated that "Blue Gum" Eucalyptus trees are one of the fastest growing varieties and Mr. Borer's comments mirror what the City has experienced in the area. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that trees planted over the years in Victoria have made good progress. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel dosed the public hearing. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated he personally spoke to Mrs. Souza prior to the appeal being filed regarding her desire or need to create documentation for arguments for preservation of the trees.. He said it was suggested that she review the current arborist report and perhaps retain her own arborist for a study. He felt the request for another 30 days to review the report should not be necessary because he believed they had been given sufficient time to get an arborist,talk to staff,or meet with the developer to address their concems. He noted that the Souza's acknowledged they received the January 23, 2003, letter. He also explained that staff reports are typically mailed out on the Thursday prior to the meeting date. He said the Souza's knew a report was coming out and they knew they could come in and review the file and arborist report. Commissioner Stewart indicated the City usually goes to great lengths to try to save trees and windrows, particularly if the windrows are protected by the Etiwanda Specific Plan. She noted that this windrow is not a protected one. However, she felt that from what she heard this evening and the reports she read, the trees seem problematic. She noted the City will have ownership of the trees and the City will be liable for any injuries. She thought it was amazing that the replacement trees will be 8-feet on center and she felt the 15-gallon size is appropriate. She believed sufficient time had been provided for the appellant to do any research necessary. She said the trees are in the center of the trail and therefore, need to be removed in order to complete the trail. She stated she could bring a multitude of residents who want the trail. She felt the trees need to be removed and there was no reason to extend the process another 30 days. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. Chairman McNiel concurred with Commissioner Stewart's comments. He felt the trees should be removed for the safety and liability issues alone. He believed the replacement trees would be better for the site. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Stewart to adopt the resolutions denying the Appeal of Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00070 and approving Development Review DRC2002-00814. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried • The Planning Commission recessed from 8:25 p.m. to 8:35 p.m. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00519 - FOUNTAINHEAD SHRUGGED-A request to construct a two tenant 2,800 square foot building with a drive-thru (Starbucks) on .42 acre of land in the Regional Related Commercial District, located at the northeast comer of Foothill Boulevard and the 1-15 northbound freeway on-ramp- Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 26, 2003 APN: 0227-211-27. Related Files: Variance DRC2002-00621 and Preliminary Review DRC2002-00282 G. VARIANCE DRC2002-00621 - FOUNTAINHEAD SHRUGGED-A request to reduce the required parking and landscaping setbacks from 45 to 20 feet, required parking from 38 to 35 parking spaces, and required lot size from 5 acres to .42 acre of land to construct a two tenant 2,800 square foot building with a drive-thru(Starbucks), on an existing .42 acre parcel in the Regional Related Commercial District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and the I-15 northbound freeway on-ramp - APN: 0227-211-27. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00519 and Preliminary Review DRC2002-00282. Kid Coury, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked if the freeway on-ramp configuration comes up to the property line. Mr. Coury responded the adjacent property is freeway right-of-way. Chairman McNiel asked if anything could be done with respect to landscaping portions of the freeway right-of-way immediately adjacent to the project. Brad Buller, City Planner, thought there may be an opportunity for some landscaping but noted they would have to stay away from the edge of the travel lane of the on ramp. Chairman McNiel asked if there would be a reciprocal parking and access agreement with the adjacent church. Mr. Coury responded affirmatively. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Craig Smith, Fountainhead Shrugged, 4301 Birch Street, #7, Newport Beach, stated his architect was available to answer questions. Mr. Smith said there is a line of Eucalyptus trees in the Caltrans right-of-way but he would not be opposed to discussing putting in a small amount of ground cover. He said he was not sure about liability issues of having his maintenance crew on Caltrans property. Chairman McNiel felt the project is nice but he was concemed about what will appear to be an abandoned area in the Caltrans right-of-way. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, noted that Standard Condition H.14 requires installation of landscaping along the boundary of the project within the freeway right-of-way or an in-lieu construction cash deposit. Richard Finkel, Bundy Finkel Architects, 20331 Irvine Avenue, Santa Ana, asked that Engineering Condition 1)d)be modified to indicate that they need to modify the traffic signal at Foothill Boulevard and the northbound 1-15 freeway on-ramp only if the project's construction affects the signal. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, indicated the intent of the condition was to modify the signal only if Foothill Boulevard improvements require it be done. He suggested modifying the condition to read that the signal would be modified as determined by the City Engineer. Mr. Finkel stated that the wall between their project and Sacred Hearth Church is a continuation of the church's wall and is desired by the church to secure the church property. He did not want to build the wall if they begin construction prior to Sacred Heart Church because it would be a freestanding wall that would not connect back to the church property. Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 26, 2003 Chairman McNiel stated he does not bet on the eventuality of projects as things change. Mr. Finkel asked if the wall would be required if Sacred Heart Church does not go forward with its construction. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated staff knows Sacred Heart intends to move forward with their project. He said staff does not want either project to go forward and have to retrofit and tear things out to install a wall. He thought it should be coordinated with whatever phase goes first. Mr. Finkel said there would be no need to tear anything out. He said it was not a big issue,they just didn't want to end up with a wall and no purpose for the wall if Sacred Heart does not move forward. Mr. Buller asked if there isn't currently a fence there to secure the church property. Mr. Finkel replied there is a chain link fence in place. Mr. Buller said this wall replaces the chain link fence. Mr. Finkel said staff has been terrific to work with. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel dosed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy felt it is an irregular property and this would work. He felt the wall should be installed. Commissioner Stewart agreed. Chairman McNiel indicated he wanted to try to get landscaping in the freeway right-of-way area. Mr. Buller suggested adding a condition that the developer seek support from Caltrans to install and maintain landscaping for the portion of the freeway right-of-way immediately west of the western parking lot. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00519 and Variance DRC2002-00282 with modifications to clarify that the traffic signal is to be modified only if determined necessary by the City Engineer and the applicant is to work with Caltrans and City staff in an effort to landscape within the freeway right-of-way to the west of the parking lot. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM15902—G & L COMMERCIAL, LLC-A request to subdivide Parcel 9 of the Virginia Dare Business Centre into 4 lots and 1 common lot on .6 acre, located on the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard -APN: 1077-661-18. Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 26, 2003 Bob Gallishaw, G & L Commercial, 206% West 33rd Street, Newport Beach, stated they will complete construction of the project the end of April and all four buildings have been sold to local owners. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Stewart, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Parcel Map SUBTPM15902. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried I. SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DA00-02 (DRC2003-00157) - RANCHO ETIWANDA 685, LLC. -A request to modify the Development Agreement regarding the timing of construction of specific infrastructure improvements, generally located north of Interstate 210 between Hanley Avenue and Day Creek Channel-Tentative Tract Maps 14493 thru 14498, 14522, 14523, 15838, and 15902. Debra Meier, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She reported that the first requested change is moot because the traffic signal at Day Creek Boulevard and Banyan Street is now operational. Commissioner Stewart observed that the City's assurance that conditions will be met is that there will still be over 100 units after these are released. Ms. Meier confirmed that was correct. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jerry Gahan, Rancho Etiwanda 685, LLC, 5109 East La Palma Avenue, Suite D, Anaheim, gave a brief history of the project and indicated Banyan Street is currently approximately 50 percent complete and they hope it will be done by early June. He stated they have put up a 200 percent cash deposit ($1.8 million) and they also have to have money set aside to guarantee construction. He stated they were processing the amendment in order to be able to have the $1.8 million cash deposit returned. He commented the developers have been very successful and are pulling permits faster than they anticipated. He reported they will hydro-seed the ball fields at the park in about five weeks and the parking lot will be built last because they are using that area for construction staging. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Tolstoy,to adopt the resolution recommending approval of the Second Amendment to Development Agreement DA00-02. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried J. VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2002-00916 — AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO. — A request to amend the Victoria Community Plan by modifying the condition requiring on-site recreational vehicle parking within the community plan boundary. Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 26, 2003 K. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 15974—AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO- A request to modify the condition of approval requiring on-site recreational vehicle parking for the approved subdivision within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan of the Victoria Community Plan, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Church Street, Day Creek Channel, Foothill Boulevard, and Etiwanda Avenue—APN: 0227-161-28, 31, 33, 35, 36, and 38; 0227-171-08, 11, 12,20,22, 23, and 25; and 0227-211-40. L. MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDR01-04 — AMERICAN BEAUTY DEVELOPMENT CO — A request to modify the condition of approval requiring on-site recreational vehicle parking for the approved Victoria Arbors Master Plan of the Victoria Community Plan, generally bounded by Base Line Road, Church Street, Day Creek Channel, Foothill Boulevard, and EtiwandaAvenue—APN: 0227-161-28, 31, 33, 35, 36, and 38; 0227- 171-08, 11, 12, 20, 22, 23, and 25; 0227-201-04, 13 through 18,22, 28 through 31, 33, and 36; and 0227-211-40. M. MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRCDR00-17 — GUARDIAN STORAGE CENTERS—A request to modify the conditions of approval by adding a requirement to allocate approximately 135 recreational vehicle spaces for the residents within the Victoria Arbors Village of the Victoria Community Plan, for a storage facility located at 12050 Arrow Route—APN: 229- 021-47 Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and indicated staff was suggesting some changes to the resolutions to clarify the acreage (approximately 175 acres) and that the storage facility would give preference to Victoria residents for a minimum of 135 RV spaces. Chairman McNiel asked how the City could be sure the contract with the storage facility will continue. Ms. Fong responded that a condition requires subsequent owners to abide by the same conditions. Chairman McNiel asked what would happen if the RV storage goes out of business. Brad Buller, City Planner, noted that the Victoria planned community is the only area in the City that was conditioned to provide a minimum number of RV lots or the availability of RV storage. He said the condition had not been applied in Terra Vista or any other part of the City. He stated staff believes there are sufficient other RV storage centers available. Commissioner Stewart asked how long the storage center would hold the spaces. Ms. Fong replied that the demand for RV storage cannot be predicted. As a result, she said the storage center will give first priority for storage to Victoria residents. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. John Morrisette, American Beauty Development Company, 16830 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 401, Encino, stated they did not chose to provide RV spaces on a designated lot because the initial location selected would be right across from the mall site and they did not feel a storage center should be part of the street scene of the mall. He indicated they found three existing RV centers within close proximity and approached Guardian Storage Centers, who agreed to give priority to Victoria residents. He stated that as demand increases, Guardian has plans to expand the existing storage facility. Jim Keefe, Vice President, Secured Equities, partner in Guardian Storage Centers, 202 Michelson Drive, Irvine, stated Secured Equities was the original applicant for the RV center and Guardian will manage it. He felt the proposal is a win/win situation. He noted the RV storage center is in the Southem California Edison easement and said they have an option on an additional 9%:acres north Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 26, 2003 of their existing site so they will be able to expand if necessary. He indicated they hope to eventually have 600-700 total spaces for RV and boat storage. He stated they will also have enclosed spaces, but they intend to market primarily to RV and boat owners with enclosed, outside, and covered spaces. Chairman McNiel asked if he was going to be receiving rents to hold spaces for Victoria residents or if the residents would merely be waitlisted if the spaces are filled. Mr. Keefe responded they will have a separate waitlist for the Victoria residents. Mike White, Manager of Victoria Arbors, 255 East Rincon Street, Corona, supported the amendment and felt it will be good for the community. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Stewart questioned if there is a City ordinance prohibiting RV parking on the street. Brad Buller, City Planner, confirmed there is and said it limits on-street parking. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 10681 Foothill Boulevard, #395, Rancho Cucamonga, stated there are also other RV facilities in the works. He agreed having an RV storage facility across from-the mall would not be a good location. He stated the private sector is responsive to market demands. Chairman McNiel again closed the public hearing. Commissioner Stewart was willing to support the project because staff felt comfortable and believed it was enforceable. She thought it makes more sense than having a designated RV spot across from the mall. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Tolstoy,to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2002-00916 and approving Modification to Tentative Tract 15974, Modification to Development Review DRCDR01-04, and Modification to Development Review DRCDR00-17 with the clarification modifications suggested by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried NEW BUSINESS O. USE DETERMINATION DRC2003-00158- FAZOLI'S RESTAURANT-A request to determine that fast-food restaurants with a drive-thru are a conditionally permitted use within the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Community Plan. Kirt Coury, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Fred Cook, Fred Cook Architects, 3184-B Airway Avenue, Costa Mesa stated Pasta West is the owner of Fazoli's Restaurant. He stated that Mobil owns the property and two years ago they drew Planning Commission Minutes -11- March 26, 2003 up a conceptual plan with two fast-food restaurants on the site. He commented they met with Nancy Fong. He observed that the Development Code allows fast-food restaurants as a conditionally permitted use in the Office Park and Neighborhood Commercial Districts and as a permitted use in the General Commercial District. He said they proceeded to develop specific site pad designs and revised the master plan for the site. He stated they were told they could not have a drive-thru in the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Community Plan only after they submitted their full plans. He explained they had not seen anything that said they are not permitted. He observed that the staff report states the concept of the Office Park parcels is to "attract professional and corporate tenants...by offering high-quality buildings in a landscaped, pedestrian-oriented environment with numerous amenities at close hand." Mr. Cook felt a casual restaurant priced right and offering good, fast casual lunches is pedestrian oriented. He pointed out there is a nearby service station with a drive-thru carwash. He said they have done fast-food restaurants for the last 12 years. He felt there is a distinction between Fazoli's and typical fast-food restaurants. He said typical fast-food restaurants are 1,300-1,400 square feet, perhaps up to 3,000 square feet;whereas Fazoli's is 3,300 square feet. He indicated Fazoli's has 110-120 seats and typical fast-food restaurants only have 30- 70. He commented that typical fast-food restaurants have plastic seating, whereas Fazoli's has upholstered seats. He circulated pictures of a similar restaurant. Mr. Cook stated that drive-thrus typically account for 50-60 percent of the business at fast-food restaurants, whereas Fazoli's does approximately 30 percent of their business via the drive-thru. Commissioner Stewart suggested that they build just a regular restaurant and allow people to go inside for pick up if they only do approximately 30 percent of their business on a take-out basis. Mr. Cook replied there are times when he doesn't have time to go inside or he sends someone to pick up food for a meeting. John Toth, Pasta West, P. O. Box 3289, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that Fazoli's is an Italian fast- food chain primarily located on the east coast. He compared it to Chiles or TGIF with a drive-thru pick-up window. He said they may later propose a straight restaurant but they want a drive-thru as this is the first one here. He indicated they have a restaurant in Norco and are building one at the Mills in front of Kohl's store. Commissioner Tolstoy noted that one of the pictures showed outdoor tables and he asked if they were proposing them here. Mr. Toth replied they do propose an outdoor eating area with umbrellas. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the exhibit showing fast-food restaurants as a conditionally permitted use was from the Development Code but the Terra Vista Community Plan only identifies fast-food restaurants in the Neighborhood Commercial District. He said the Development Code exhibit was merely to show the applicant and the Commission that the requested use is permitted in other areas of the City. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the Terra Vista Community Plan was well thought out and the City should continue with the plan as conceived rather than amending it. Commissioner Stewart concurred. She said there are a lot of fast-food restaurants in the community. Chairman McNiel noted that when Fazoli's attempted to locate at an altemate site, there were all kinds of parking problems because they were trying to squeeze onto too small of a site. He felt there are plenty of places where fast-food restaurants are permitted. He believed Fazoli's is a fast-food Planning Commission Minutes -12- March 26, 2003 restaurant with more seats. He suggested the applicant meet with staff to determine where they can go. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested they locate at this site because he felt a sit-down restaurant in the Office Park District is a great idea. However, he did not feel a drive-thru is appropriate for the site selected. Commissioner Stewart agreed the restaurant should go in at that location without the drive-thru. Mr. Buller acknowledged the applicant had approached staff and talked generally but it was not discovered until they submitted that technically a drive-thru was not permitted at that site. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Tolstoy,to adopt the resolution denying Use Determination DRC2003-00158. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS - carried Mr. Buller said he was impressed with what he knows of Fazoli's. Commissioner Tolstoy felt they should be encouraged to remain at the site but without the drive-thru. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS P. DIRECTOR'S REPORT DRC2003-00194 - FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT - Discussion of increased height limits for light standards for the Victoria Gardens Regional Center and potential associated amendments to either the Development Code or the Victoria Gardens Regional Center Development Agreement No. DA01-02 to allow light standards in parking lots and private streets to be in excess of 15 feet in height. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Michael Gehring, architect, 13051 Santa Monica,#410, Los Angeles, stated that department stores have a national standard of 60-foot high lighting because such high lights are only needed every fourth drive-aisle and they cast a more even pattem of lighting. He noted that Montclair and the Mills have 60-foot high lights. He showed exhibits of the different types of lights they propose for the various areas. He stated that 15-foot high lights must be placed at every drive-aisle and they cast an uneven light pattern as they filter through the tree canopies. He indicated that their lights will be white. Mr. Gehring stated that better lights give patrons a greater feeling of security. Because fewer lights are needed at the higher height, he felt they would blend in better with the trees. He stated that 15-foot high poles create a sea of glare spots. He reported they intend to up-light the trees, use string lights in the paseos, and up-light comers and towers of some buildings. He said they plan to use sconces to emphasize differences in style. He thought they may use the Victoria Gardens logos on the poles and indicated signs may be posed on the poles to help people remember where they park and the poles may also be used for promotional banners. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if he said Montclair has 60-foot high lights. Mr. Gehring replied it is at least 60 feet with 6-8 big heads around the pole. Planning Commission Minutes -13- March 26, 2003 Commissioner Tolstoy commented that trees are supposed to spread out and the trees in their drawings are columnar. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff was recommending that the Commission support a Development Agreement Amendment to allow some 30-foot high lights south of North Main Street but staff is concerned about having fixtures higher than 15 feet closer to the residential areas. He indicated the amendment would be returned for the Commission's consideration at the next meeting. Commissioner Tolstoy commented that it is important to bear in mind the comfort of the people living north of the project and glare at night must be considered. He also noted the City strives for pedestrian scale. He thought it may be a good idea to light the major lot as they suggest because it would provide more visibility from the freeway and Foothill Boulevard but he thought the inside of the project should be more pedestrian friendly with human-scaled fixtures. Commissioner Stewart thought she could agree with that logic. She thought there is an argument for 30-foot tall lights in some areas but it is important to pay attention to the residents to the north. She liked the hierarchy. She asked if the developer had asked the department stores about the 15-foot lights. Steve Wesson, Forest City Development, 949 South Hope Street,#200, Los Angeles,said they have dealt with the department stores regarding standards for sidewalks, landscaping, and parking lot lighting. He stated they have not told them that the lights must be 15 feet high because they are —complex negotiations and they would have_to take that matter up to the top management. He said they recognize that certain areas should have 15-foot high lights but the stores want high lights directly outside their stores. He agreed it is necessary to lower the level in the areas adjacent to residential development. Commissioner Tolstoy noted that the City has always tried to protect people living adjacent to commercial projects. He stated that years ago the City passed a sign ordinance and businesses objected and said the regulations conflicted with their national signs, but the businesses met the City's guidelines. Mr. Wesson said regional department stores have a standard for 60 feet and the 30-foot poles they are proposing is a compromise on the part of the department stores. He also felt the 30-foot poles work better. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated he would accept 30-foot high lights on the exterior, larger lots, but he suggested using 15-foot high poles in the smaller lots on either side of the majors as well as by the library and cultural center. Commissioner Stewart felt staff could work it out. She felt 30-foot lights would be appropriate even in the smaller lots and she thought that is a workable compromise. Mr. Buller said there are additional pedestrian light fixtures along the walkways that would lead to the parking lots. Mr. Gehring said 30-foot high lights are only in the parking fields and everything touching the building is pedestrian scale. Mr. Wesson agreed that 15-foot fixtures are acceptable adjacent to the buildings. Chairman McNiel stated he was inclined to agree with Commissioner Stewart about the field lighting. He agreed it should be 15 feet north of North Main Street. Regarding the concrete bases, he noted they appear to be typical round bases with flat tops. He stated they should be more attractive and he suggested they use tapered tops so that people cannot leave cups, etc. on the tops of the bases. Planning Commission Minutes -14- March 26, 2003 Mr. Buller said it was his understanding that the Commissioners support 30-foot fixtures but the two center cores should have 15-foot lights. He thought two of the three Commissioners support 30-foot high fixtures in the two smaller lots adjacent to the majors. He also thought further discussions may be needed regarding north of North Main Street. He said that direction would give the applicant the ability to demonstrate sight lines. It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to process an amendment to the Development Agreement. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated staff was still trying to arrange a field trip for the Commissioners to visit design award nominations. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Stewart, carried 3-0-1 (Macias absent), to adjoum. The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, B Iler Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -15- March 26, 2003