HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/01/22 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
January 22, 1992
Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council
Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho
Cucamonga, California. Chairman'McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS:
PRESENT:
Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel, John
Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT:
Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer; Brad Buller, City
Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Tom Grahnj
Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer;
Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes,
Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; L.
Dennis Michael, Fire Chief; Scott Murphy, Associate
Planner; Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner; Steve Ross,
Assistant Planner; Gall Sanchez, Planning Commission
Secretary
, , , ,
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Brad Bullet, City Planner, commented that staff had received a request to
continue Item O to the February 26, 1992, meeting.
Mrl Buller remarked that tonight's meeting would adjourn to a joint meeting
with City Council on January 29, 1992, to be held in the Rains Room beginning
at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Bullet noted that staff had received a letter from Forma indicating that
Shell Oil would like to request that Item A be pulled from the Consent
Calendar for discussion-
Commissioner Melcher remarked that he had been privileged to attend the
dedication ceremony for the new fire stations. He noted that the Planning
Commission had received praise from the Mayor and others for work done on the
stations.
, , , ,
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Melcher, unanimously carried, to adopt
the Minutes of December 17, 1991, as amended.
, , , , ,
CONSENT CALENDAR
Ae
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-20 - SHELL OIL -
Resolution of denial of a request to establish a gas station, mini-market,
and car wash on a 1.31 acre parcel in the Medium Residential designation,
(8-14 dwelling units per acre) of the Tetra Vista Planned Community,
located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Rochester Avenue -
APN: 227-151-17. (Continued from January 8, 1992.)
Be
2)
3)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 89-03 - U.
S. HOME CORPORATION - Resolution of denial of a request to amend certain
development standards within the Etiwanda Specific Plan as described
below:
1) To allow single family detached residential development within the
Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) utilizing
Basic Development Standards~ and
To reduce the minimum average lot size from 10,000 square feet to
8,900 square feet within the Low Medium Residential District (4-8
dwelling units per acre) under Basic Development Standards; and
To reduce the minimum average lot size from 10,000 square feet to
8,500 square feet within the Medium Residential District (8-14
dwelling units per acre) under Basic Development Standards.
(Continued from January 8, 1992.)
TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13835 - HOMESTEAD - A request for a
time extension for a residential subdivision of 78 single family lots on
25 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per
acre) located at the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester -
APN: 225-152-01 through 04 and 18.
TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14055 - MODERN CORPORATION - A request
for a time extension for a 3-lot subdivision and design review of 115
condominium units on 10.27 acres of land in the Medium Residential
District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located north of Arrow Highway
and east of Baker Avenue - APN: 207-201-32 and 12.
Item A was pulled for discussion.
Motion: Moved by Chitlea, seconded by Vailerrs, to adopt Items B, C, and D of
the Consent Calendar.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-20
Chairman McNiel invited public comment.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 22, 1992
George Theodorou, Forma, 10790 Civic Center Drive, #100, Rancho Cucamonga,
stated he was representing Shell Oil. He requested clarification on the
resolution regarding the finding that there was inadequate buffering to
mitigate the impacts of the station on the adjoining residential area. He
asked if it was the intention of the Commission to deny the application based
on the buffering.
There were no additional public comments.
Commissioner Chitlea commented that she did not believe the use is appropriate
directly adjacent to a residential area. She felt the impact is too great and
additional buffering would be needed.
Commissioner Vallette agreed that there was inadequate buffering.
Commissioner Tolstoy thought the buffering may be adequate. He said he had
voted against the project because of the proposed 24-hour per day operation in
a residential neighborhood.
Commissioner Chitlea commented Commissioner Tolstoy had objected to the
operation because of its proximity to the residences, and therefore, it
appeared the buffering from the neighborhood was inadequate.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt the landscaping to be sufficient buffering for day
time operations, but not night time. He agreed that the statement regarding
inadequate buffering should remain in the the resolution.
Motion: Moved by Chitlea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the resolution
denying Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 91-20. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
CHITlEA, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
MCNIEL, MELCHER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE -carried
, · , ,
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Ee
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90-01 AND GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 90-03B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A public hearing to comment
on the draft final environmental impact report prepared for the Etiwanda
North Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment 90-03B to prezone
approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho Cucamonga sphere of
influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling units on 2,473 acres
of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial use, 4 schools, 5
parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112 acres of open space
generally located north of Highland Avenue (State Route 30), south of the
San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City of Fontana, and east of
Milliken Avenue. (Continued from January 8, 1992.)
Planning Commission Minutes
-3-
January 22, 1992
Fe
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN 90-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A request to recommend approval of the Etiwanda North Specific
Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho
Cucamonga sphere of influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling
units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial
use, 4 scheols, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and. preservation of 4,112
acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State
Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City
of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. (Continued from January 8,
1992.)
Ge
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-03B - CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to recommend approval of a General Plan
Amendment to provide consistency with the draft Etiwanda North Specific
Plan, prezoning approximately 6,840 acres of territory in the Rancho
Cucamonga sphere of influence to provide for 3,613 single family dwelling
units on 2,473 acres of vacant land, 28 acres of neighborhood commercial
use, 4 schools, 5 parks, an equestrian center, and preservation of 4,112
acres of open space generally located north of Highland Avenue (State
Route 30), south of the San Bernardino National Forest, west of the City
of Fontana, and east of Milliken Avenue. (Continued from January 8,
1992.)
Chairman McNiel noted that staff had requested the items be continued to
February 26, 1992.'
Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Environmental
Impact Report for Specific Plan 90-01 and General Plan Amendment 90-03B,
Environmental Assessment and Specific Plan 90-01, and Environmental Assessment
and General Plan Amendment 90-03B. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE -carried
· , , ,
He
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-23
- RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - The development of Fire Station
No~ 4, Phase II, consisting of a 24,030 square foot maintenance and
training facility, a 3,432 square foot training tower, a 120 square foot
pump test enclosure, and an emergency hellspot on 7.08 acres of land in
the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9) of the Industrial
Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Jersey Boulevard
and Milliken Avenue - APN: 229-111-23. Staff recommends issuance of a
Negative Declaration. (Continued from December 17, 1991.)
Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 22, 1992
Commissioner Melcher questioned the training and utilization of maintenance
workers to assist with the operation of the hazardous waste collection
facility site.
L. Dennis Michael, Fire Chief, commented that the site will be open from
10=00 a.m. to -2:00 p.m. on Saturday only. He etated that the maintenance
workers will be used so that it would not be necessary to close the collection
facility if fire department personnel were called to respond to emergency
calls. He reported that four community volunteers have also been recruited to
assist in maintaining the site during hours of operation. He observed that
the collection facility may expand its hours in the future. Chief Michael
thanked the Commission and staff for their work on the project.
Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing.
closed the hearing.
There was no testimony and he
Commissioner Melcher requested the comments of the Design Review Committee
regarding the revisions of the design of the plaza element.
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the Design Review Committee had
suggested additional street furniture or tree wells in the circular element of
the plaza. He said staff would follow through.
Motion: Moved by Vallette, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a negative
declaration and adopt the resolution approving Environmental Assessment and
Modification to Conditional Use Permit 89-23. Motion carried by the following
vote:
AYES= COMMISSIONERS:
CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES= COMMISSIONERS= NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE -carried
· , , , ,
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90-16 {GOVERNMENT
REFERRAL 89-08) - CHINO BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT - A request to
establish a wastewater treatment plant on 32.5 acres of land in the Heavy
Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan,
located at the southwest corner of 6th Street and Etiwanda Avenue - APN:
229-283-62.
Steve Ross, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman McNlel opened the public hearing.
Vincent DePalma, Manager of Engineering and Planning, Chino Basin Municipal
Water District, objected to Engineering Condition I requiring construction of
the north half of 6th Street across the street from their project. He said
their board felt there was no connection to their project and they estimated
Planning Commis~ion Minutes -5- January 22, 1992
the cost to be approximately $200,000. He protested that the improvements
were not Justified because their project would not be generating that much
traffic. Regarding Engineering Condition 3, he said they did not object to
installing the storm drain lines in 6th Street and Etiwanda adjacent to their
property, but he felt they should not be required to construct the storm drain
in Etiwanda Avenue down to 4th Street or to an existing portion if constructed
by others. He stated a portion of the storm drain will front the newly
constructed San Bernardino County detention center and felt the County should
have constructed the storm drain in that area. He said it would be an
additional $200,000 expenditure if they were required to construct the storm
drain down to 4th Street. He remarked that the Board of Chino Basin Municipal
Water District had taken a strong position in opposing those two conditions.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the south portion of 6th Street
is currently improved and the condition requires that the applicant improve
the north half of 6th Street. He said it has been the Commission's policy to
improve streets full width whenever streets are being improved. He observed
that this project would be using 6th Street and there would be truck
traffic. He felt that the current 26 feet of pavement is very narrow for
truck traffic. He said Engineering Condition 3 regarding the storm drain
merely complies with the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Plan in effect for tha~
area. He said that whoever builds first. puts in the lines to certain
designated points.
Commissioner Melcher asked why the County did not install the drains.
Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer, stated the County and City have a joint
project to install the storm drain in front of the detention center. He said
there is a fixed funding source for the whole project and the County was told
when they went out to bids that the storm drain would not have to be built if
the bids came in too high. He observed it is still unsure if the County will
construct the storm drain. He noted Chino Basin Municipal Water District has
to intercept the runoff from the two culverts on 6th Street which take water
right through their site. He said that runoff must be diverted to a location
where it can be safely disposed of.
Chairman McNiel asked if there would be a way to provide for reimbursement to
Chino Basin Municipal Water District when the undeveloped County property is
developed or sold.
Mr. Bose stated it would be possible to prepare a reimbursement agreement if
future development occurs.
Commissioner Melcher asked if it would be possible to take the flows to a
detention basin constructed on site. He noted that there is a lot of site
area that is not being developed at this time.
Mr. Bose responded that it would be against the City Council policy. He said
they do not want to blanket the entire area with detention basins because that
Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 22, 1992
would not work properly. He thought it would be advantageous to connect to
the existing storm drain culvert at the intersection of 4th Street and
Etiwanda Avenue.
Commissioner Melcher commented that it was nice to have worked with the Chino
Basin Municipa~ Water District on the project in a mutually beneficial way.
He suggested that the Commission approve the project with a recommendation
that the two conditions could be appealed to the City Council.
Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated the appeal process in in place and
Commissioner Melcher's comments would be noted in the minutes.
Commissioner Chitiea commented that in the past the Commission has
consistently required full-width streets and there have been problems where
full-width streets are not in place. She noted that any vehicular traffic in
and out of the facility will need to go both directions. She felt the street
should be constructed full width as soon as possible and Engineering Condition
1 was appropriate. She thought the storm drains should be connected to the
closest place possible and the improvements should be put in place as soon as
possible. She did not wish to recommend that City Council modify the
requirements-
Con~nissioners Tolstoy and Vallette agreed.
Chairman McNiel observed that no project is an island. He noted that the
Engineering conditions were consistent with what has been required in the past
and he commented that half streets are not safe. He felt the storm drain
construction is vital to the City and mentioned that reimbursement agreements
are available.
Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that additional wording be added to the
resolution to clarify that Chino Basin Municipal Water District was
responsible for changes incorporated into the project to lessen environmental
effects. identified in the final Environmental Impact Report.
Motion: Moved by Chitlea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the resolution
approving Conditional Use Permit 90-16 (Government Referral 89-08), with the
addition of clarification language regarding responsibility for lessening
environmental impacts. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
CHITIEA, MCNIEL, M~LCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NSES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
NONE -carried
Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the City should take steps to be sure adequate
piping is installed to allow the movement and use of the treated water. He
thought the water should be used for irrigation of medians, parks, and
parkways wherever possible. He suggested that whenever streets are torn up, a
secondary pipe should be installed for transportation of the treated water.
Planning Commission Minutes
-7-
January 22, 1992
Mr. Bose etated that the City is actively pursuing the process of getting the
reclaimed water from the facility. He said the sports complex will have a
dual water system so that it can be switched over to utilize the reclaimed
water.
, , , ,
Je
Ke
MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-14 - RANCHO TECHNOLOGY CENTER -
A request to modify an approved 18.42 acre master plan by eliminating
Building "G" and replacing it with parking spaces in the General
Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan,
located at the northwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald Avenue -
APN= 209-021-16, 17, and 05. Related files Tentative Parcel Map 13961.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13961 - RANCHO
TECHNOLOGy CENTER - The subdivision of 18.42 acres of land into 5 parcels
in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Area
Specific Plan, located at the northwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald
Avenue - APN: 209-021-16, 17, and 5. Staff recon~nends issuance of a
Negative Declaration. Related file= Conditional Use Permit 85-14.
Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Melcher asked the reason for the project.
Ms. Nissen responded that the applicant was proposing that each individual
building with its own parking be contained on an individual parcel to
facilitate sale.
Commissioner Melcher asked if the intensity could not be increased.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, responded that it could.
Chairman McNiel asked the difference in elevation from Archibald down to the
parking lot.
Ms. Nissen replied that it is slightly lower and the current grade would
remain approximately the same.
Chairman McNlel opened the public hearing.
John Wurtz, J. W. Engineering, 99 "C" Street, Suite 200, Upland, stated the
grading will be consistent with the existing parking but the building pad
would be leveled for better drainage.
Chairman McNiel asked if the drainage would run off into the parking area for
Building H.
Mr. Wurtz noted that the drainage will be directed to 9th Street, away from
Archibald.
Planning Commission Minutes
-8-
January 22, 1992
Co~nissioner Tolstoy asked if there would be a reciprocal parking agreement
between parcels.
Mr. Wurtz responded affirmatively and said they had already obtained signed
agreements.
Chairman McNiel asked the plans for construction of additional buildings along
9th Street.
Mr. Wurtz replied that Parcel 2 is a separate parcel and it will be the
responsibility of whoever buys the parcel to process the development plans for
Building B.
Chairman McNiel stated there are planters filled with volcanic rock and a
small, abandoned garage located near Building H. He requested that they be
removed.
Mr. Wurtz agreed that they should be removed.
Commissioner Tolstoy requested that the parked cars be screened from Archibald
Avenue.
Mr. Wurtz remarked there is landscaping along Archibald Avenue consistent with
City requirements.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there will be berming in the area of the flood
wall.
Ms. Nissen stated that none was proposed.
Commissioner Chitlea thought that harming may be appropriate.
Mr. Coleman observed that the wall itself and the shrub massing on top of the
wall will provide screening.
Commissioner Vallette asked if the project should return to Design Review.
Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested harming and landscaping of the Archibald
frontage could be conditioned to come back to staff for review and approval.
Chairman McNiel believed staff could handle the matter. He thought the
difference in elevation would also help to conceal vehicles.
Commissioner Tolstoy agreed.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing.
Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the resolution
approving Modification to Conditional Use Permit 85-14, issue a Negative
Declaration, and adopt the resolution approving Tentative Parcel Map 13961,
with modification to direct staff to pay particular attention to screening of
parking from Archibald Avenue. Motion carried by the following vote=
Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 22, 1992
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT .- COMMISSIONERS:
, · , ,
CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NONE
NONE -carried
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 92-01 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A proposal to amend Figure III-7, Master Plan of Trails,
regarding certain trail locations. Staff recommends issuance of a
Negative Declaration.
Me
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 92-01
- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A proposal to amend Figure II-7 and Figures
IV-1 through IV-19 regarding certain trail locations. Staff recommends
issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Ne
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 92-01 - CITY
OF RANCHO CUCANONGA - A proposal to amend Figure 5-18 and Figures 5-20
through 5-40 regarding certain trail locations and to amend Article
5.33,200 regarding Community Trails. Staff recommends issuance of a
Negative Declaration.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Chitlea commended Mr. Coleman and Beverly Nissen, Associate
Planner, for their work on the amendments to make the plans more accurate and
consistent. She heartily recommended adoption of the amendments.
Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing
hearing was closed.
There was no testimony, so the
Motion: Moved by Chitlea, seconded by Tolstoy, to recommend issuance of
Negative Declarations and adopt the resolutions recommending adoption of
Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 92-01, Environmental
Assessment and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment, and Environmental
Assessment and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment 92-01. Motion carried by the
following vote=
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
CHITIEA, MCNIEE, MELCMER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES= COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT~ COMMISSIONERS:
NONE -carried
Commissioner Tolstoy praised Mr. Coleman for his work with the Trails
Committee over the years.
Chairman McNiel noted that the League of California Cities had recently
published an article from Mr. Coleman regarding trails.
Planning CommisSion Minutes
-10-
January 22, 1992
DIRECTOR' S REPORTS
O. LETTER FROM LARRY YOUNG REGARDING ORDINANCE NO. 398, CAR WASHES WITHIN
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
Brad Buller remarked that the matter should be carried over to February 26,
1992. He said no action would be necessary because the matter is not a public
hearing.
, , , ,
COMMISSION BUSINESS
P. CROSS LOT OR THROUGH LOT DRAINAGE POLICY
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report.
Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Chitlea, to adopt the resolution
approving Cross Lot or Through Lot Drainage Policy. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES= COMMISSIONERS:
CHITIEA, MCNIEL, HELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE
NOES= COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS=
NONE -carried
, , · · ·
Q. UPDATE ON STATUS OF REGIONAL MALL - (Oral report)
Brad Buller, City Planner, stated it was not known when the Planning
Commission would again be involved with reviewing the design elements of the
site plan and the architecture of the regional mall. He remarked that the
City Council was moving forward with the assessment district. He observed
that the assessment district issue is a stepping stone toward moving along the
development of the regional mall as the district would make it possible to
obtain the infrastructure features needed to support the mall.
Chairman McNiel asked if Planning staff had been in contact with the design
team.
Mr. Buller responded that the Redevelopment Agency has been in constant
contact with the Hahn Company, but more on the assessment district issues
rather than the design. He noted that Commissioner Melcher had asked if the
presence of the horned lizard hadI been confirmed and if that had any bearing
on the status of the shopping center. Mr. Buller stated that a letter had
been received from the United States Department of the Interior regarding the
potential endangered species and critical habitat review. He reported that
Planning Commission Minutes
-11-
January 22, 1992
the species is listed as a Category 2 candidate, which means that development
of the property would not be prohibited. He stated it had been determined
that the area would not be the best habitat for trying to preserve or protect
the species because of the urban development which has already taken place.
He noted that with the introduction of domestic cats and dogs into the area,
the lizards themselves choose to locate elsewhere. He stated that floodways
and Edison corridors will still provide a habitat kor the lizards. He
commented that the lizard has apparently been found elsewhere along the 1-15
corridor.
Commissioner Melcher requested that the Redevelopment Agency be advised that
the Commission feels the mall should be presented in a timely fashion to allow
proper review time.
Commissioner Chitlea wholeheartedly concurred.
Chairman McNiel felt the request was fair and reasonable.
Mr. Buller commented that it is the goal of City staff, including the
Redevelopment Agency staff, to keep the Commission involved in the review of
the regional mall and to provide adequate time for that review.
Commissioner Tolstoy noted that the Commission had provided input to the
architectural team, but he was not sure if those comments would be appropriate
after a redesign. He felt that historically when a large project lies dormant
for a long period of time, suddenly approvals are needed in a hurry without
allowing sufficient time for review. He hoped that would not happen with the
mall.
Commissioner Melcher remarked that the City is not an uninvolved bystander in
the development of the mall because it has a major business objective of
obtaining the sales tax dollars.
Commissioner Chitlea felt it was an appropriate topic for the joint meeting.
· , , , ,
R. DISCUSSION OF DESIGN REVIEW POLICIES
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated the item was placed on the agenda at
the request of Commissioner Melcher to determine the process for formalizing
Planning Commission policies.
Chairman McNiel suggested that the listing of potential policy issues be
reviewed to establish which should become policy. He thought the Commission
should also discuss how Design Review Committee suggestions should become
policy and which policies should be made into ordinances.
Commissioner Melcher stated he had brought up the issue specifically because
of Commissioner Vallette's request for dual glazing on all windows of homes on
small lots to mitigate noise from adjacent properties. He felt that if the
Planning Commission Minutes
-12-
January 22, 1992
requirement were placed on a specific project, it should be applied to all
other projects with the same criteria. He observed that it is easier for
developers to deal with written policies.
Brad Buller, City Planner, commented that according to the Building and Safety
Department staff, it is possible for the Planning Commission to require dual
glazing on all windows. He questioned if only lot size should be considered
or if other factors, such as the location of the windows and their orientation
and proximity to adjacent properties, should also be weighed. He observed
that larger lots with 5-foot setbacks could have the same proximity to
adjacent yards.
Commissioner Vallette agreed that if a new suggestion is put forth during
Design Review, the entire Commission should hear about the requirement to
determine if it should become policy. She felt the adoption of policies would
enable developers to learn of requirements earlier in the process. She
suggested a procedure be set up to review and adopt policies.
Chairman McNiel suggested that proposed policies might be introduced at one
meeting and brought back for a decision at the following meeting.
Mr. Buller suggested adding a topic' of Design Policies as a regular agenda
item. He thought it important to begin formalizing the process.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that when a new idea is suggested at a Design
Review Committee meeting staff should begin advising developers that the idea
may be adopted as policy.
Chairman McNiel suggested that such items be introduced at the meetings
following Design Review.
Commissioner Melcher felt dual glazed windows should be required on all
windows on minimum lot sizes.
Commissioner Vallette felt that perhaps the dual glazing should also be
required for all dwellings with 5-foot setbacks from side yards.
Commissioner Melcher commented that dual glazing perhaps should not be
required for garage windows with 5-foot setbacks.
Commissioner Tolstoy suggested requiring the dual glazing for habitable
spaces.
Commissioner Chitlea observed that someone using a sander in their garage
could potentially bother neighbors in their yards.
Mr. Bullet questioned if the Commission may wish to require dual glazing on
all windows. He suggested that staff could determine the additional cost of
dual glazing.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 22, 1992
Commissioner Chitlea suggested that dual glazing of the windows would save
heating and cooling costs.
Mr. Buller pointed out that there may be a variety of economic tradeoffe if
dual glazing is required.
Commissioner Melcher was not sure the requirement should be applied City wide.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt it should apply to multi-family projects.
Chairman McNiel felt the requirement should be applied in the grandest
fashion. He suggested that developers should present criteria to substantiate
that the dual glazing is not needed.
Commissioner Melcher observed there are certain other requirements which are
more stringent on smaller lots. He noted that a problem has been identified
which is apparent on small lots. He did not feel the requirement should be
applied universally. He indicated he would support the requirement being
imposed on windows of habitable space within 10 feet of a side property line
and on all windows on lots of 5,000 square feet or less. He noted that there
are more stringent construction requirements on multi-family development with
respect to protecting people from noise from other units. He suggested dua-1
glazing may be required where windows are within 20 feet of another building.
Commissioner Vallette thought multi-family units should have dual glazed
windows.
Chairman McNiel suggested that staff review the requirements with the Building
and Safety Department.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had recently toured a multi-family project and
observed six air conditioning units right by a window.
Commissioner Melcher felt that dual glazing should be required on multi-family
projects for any window within 20 feet of an air conditioning unit.
Commissioner Tolstoy worried that if dual glazing were required on a
unilateral basis, if it may limit special shapes because custom windows may be
too costly.
Mr. Bullet suggested the item could be discussed on a future agenda.
Next the Com~ission discussed the proposed requirement for one-story
floorplans on corner lots.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt that single-story plans should be included in all
developments.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that when she recently toured subdivisions, she
felt that two-story homes sometimes look better on corner lots because they
don't appear so crowded.
Planning Commission Minutes
-14-
January 22, 1992
Chairman McNiel noted that on several occasions, the Commission had asked
developers to incorporate approximately 15 percent single-story plans.
Commissioner Chitiea felt it is appropriate to mix one- and two-story units.
She thought it would be strange to have single-story houses on every corner.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that on some of the projects the Commission
recently toured with small lots and large homes, there was an appearance of a
concrete jungle.
Commissioner Melcher disclosed that when he worked for Lewis Homes, they had
used certain plotting criteria in developments with a mix of one- and two-
story houses. He said they never plotted a single-story unit between two
2-story units and never placed a 2-story house between two 1-story houses. He
said they also always utilized single-story units on corner lots. He thought
the mix led to a lot of pl'easant streetscapes. He felt it may be difficult to
get developers to build single-story houses and he suggested perhaps requiring
wider side yards on two-story homes.
Commissioner Chitlea agreed that might be a good way to approach the
subject. She felt that a certain number of single-story homes should be
required to provide a variety.
Mr. Buller said the Planning Commission has the authority to look at
designs. He said the Commission could require single-story homes within
subdivisions.
Commissioner Vallette observed that she did not feel comfortable having a
developer go all through the process and then be told at Design Review that
they must introduce single-story units. She requested that staff further
investigate single-story introduction.
Chairman McNiel agreed.
The Commission next discussed the number of elevations.
Commissioner Chitiea felt that at least three elevations should be required
per plan.
Mr. Coleman suggested that such a requirement may cause developers to propose
fewer elevations.
Chairman McNiel suggested that the Commission review the list and make
additions or deletions.
Commissioner Chitiea felt that doors and downspouts should not be highlighted
with accent color on either commercial/industrial or residential development.
She said that when she was looking at residential projects recently she
noticed one which had accented every pipe and downspout.
Planning Commission Minutes -15- January 22, 1992
Commissioner Melcher remarked that he would not mind that as a guideline, but
he disagreed that it should be policy. He felt that accents can be meaningful
for doors or downspouts'and a policy would stifle creativity. He asked if the
Commissioners would require painted downspouts if an architect proposed a
stucco building with copper gutters and downspouts.
Mr. Buller remarked that developers have complained that the City's policies
and directions continually change. He agreed that developers should be told
as early as possible in the process. He commented that the Commission must be
cognizant of how often policies are changed. He said new things should not be
added every week and only the important items should made into policy. He
suggested that the subject be discussed at the workshop at the Tolstoy
residence.
Chairman McNiel stated the process does not have an end until the project is
built because the Commission has an opportunity to make additional changes
when a time extension is granted. He commented that each project is unique
and different things may apply. He said the project is in process until it is
built and he did not think the Commission should feel guilty about adding
requirements at any time during that process.
, · , ,
S. DISCUSSION OF AGENDA EXHIBITS - (Oral report)
Commissioner Melcher noted that some of the exhibits are too small to read.
He said the package recently provided by the sign company, was easy to work
with.. He requested that exhibits be provided on 11 inch by 14 inch paper.
Commissioner Chitlea suggested that because three of the Commissioners would
already have a full set of plans, perhaps extra plans could be brought to the
conference room before the meeting so that interested Commissioners could
scrutinize them. She said that would alleviate the additional paper, time,
and expense that would be incurred in providing large sets for each
Commissioner.
Brad Buller, City Planner, agreed that staff could provide a full set of plans
for each project. He asked how frequently the Commissioners felt they could
not make a decision because they could not read the plans.
Commissioner Melcher noted that grading plans are almost always impossible to
read. He thought that a few minutes before the Commission meeting would not
solve that problem. He said if it is not practical to provide 11 inch x 14
inch plans, that was satisfactory.
chairman McNiel agreed that grading plans are hard to read. He noted that
would be difficult and expensive to collate larger exhibits into the agenda.
He said staff is generally working on a very short time line.
Commissioner Melcher suggested adding language to the application forms that
they must be readable at an 8-1/2 inch by 11 inch size.
Planning Commission Minutes
-16-
January 22, 1992
The Commissioners agreed that was a good idea.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, observed that in many cities, the Commission
receives full size plans.
Commissioner Melcher noted that was done in Redlands and it is very
cumbersome.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt it would be satisfactory to have the plans available
at the meeting.
Chairman McNiel agreed that staff should also ask for more defined reduced
drawings from the applicants.
, , · , ·
Commissioner Vallette commented that she and Commissioner Tolstoy had toured
with the public works staff. She said that City Engineer Joe O'Neil, Deputy
City Engineer Shintu Bose, Parks/Landscape Maintenance Superintendent Jeff
Barnes, Public Works Maintenance Manager Bob Zetterberg, Landscape Designer
Laura Bonaccorsi, and City Council Member Diana Willlame had been on the
tour. She felt it was a unanimous conclusion that there is a problem that
needs to be addressed with regards to the trees. She thought the problems
appear more extensive in the planned communities because of the extent of the
landscaping and the location in the high-wind area east of Haven. She said
they discussed a need for immediate staking of trees after high winds and City
maintenance is dealing with that. She thought deciduous trees appear more
appropriate than eucalyptus for those areas because the eucalyptus do not
appear to be as resilient. She commented that Commissioner Tolstoy made a
suggestion that 5-gallon eucalyptus would be more appropriate to allow
establishment of a root system.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that 15-gallon eucalyptus trees are root-bound
and they do not develop a proper root system after being planted.
Chairman McNlel asked how long it would take for a 5-gallon tree to reach the
same size as the 1S-gallon one.
Mr. Buller said it would be equal within a year and half.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that a eucalyptus tree requires an extensive
root system for the large head to withstand winds. He said most nurseries
force their trees by over-fertilization and placing them close together so
that the trees will grow tall to reach the sun. He said the result is that
the trees are not strong. He thought the City should get rid of a lot of
eucalyptus trees, especially those planted in lawns because they do not
receive deep root watering, but instead are watered too frequently for the
trees.
Commissioner Melcher asked if it wnuld be possible to require more
sophisticated irrigation systems.
Planning Commission Minutes
-17-
January 22, 1992
Mr. Buller said that standards are constantly being upgraded.
Commissioner Vallette stated that in newer areas a lot of the eucalyptus trees
are not surviving. She said there had been discussions about phasing in
deciduous trees for replacement.
Commissioner Tolstoy noted that it was mentioned that the City may be growing
some of our own replacement trees. He said the City could then be sure the
trees are not root bound when they are planted. He said the City does not
have enough inspectors to be sure that trees planted by developers are not
root bound. He thought that some of the tree planting requirements should be
changed.
Commissioner Vallette commented that eucalyptus trees require a lot of
maintenance, in that they continually need to be trimmed back in order to grow
in a healthy manner. She felt that additional staff is needed in order to
maintain the trees. She said that trees put in four years ago need to be
maintained for several more years in order to ensure that they will be quality
trees at maturity. She said it is sad when trees are lost because a lot of
time has been invested. She was concerned that if trees are removed without a
phasing process that other trees will be lost.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that one problem is that in the past
inappropriate plant materials were selected by architects in the parks. He
said at the time, the City did not have knowledgeable staff to know that the
trees were not appropriate and were sometimes planted in incompatible areas.
He said City staff now reviews all park plans to be sure that materials are
suitable and planted in the proper areas. He said many of the trees currently
being lost were planted without any City inspection because the City did not
have staff to do inspections.
Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer, commented that the City had received a
grant to replace some trees.
Mr. Bullet commented that Otto Kroutil is the staff person trying to resolve
the windrow tree replacement policy. He said he was trying to fold in
discussions regarding planting details, standards, and policy direction for
replacement. He said Mr. Kroutil would work with the public works staff and
keep the Commission updated on discussions.
Commissioner Vallette asked if it would be appropriate for Ms. Bonaccorsi and
Mr. Barnes to address the Commission at the next Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that Ms. Bonaccorsi and Mr. Barnes present some
recommendations to the Commission regarding those items the Commission can
help with, such as selection of trees, planting procedures, etc.
Mr. Bose said he understood one of the main concerns from the tour was to
chose the right species of tree for a particular use, mostly in the turf
area. He said a question had been raised as to whether trees should be
replaced in kind or with a different species when some of the street trees
need to be replaced.
Planning Commission Minutes -18- January 22, 1992
Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that was a tough question.
Chairman McNiel agreed it would be a difficult decision, because not all of
the trees fail.
Mr. Bose thought it may be appropriate to discuss in ~ workshop forum. He
said they are currently working on a replacement policy because of the
grant. He thought it might be helpful to meet with the Commission prior to
finalizing the program.
Mr. Bullet stated that the item would be scheduled for Commission discussion
when engineering staff indicates they are ready. He said that Commissioner
Vallette had brought up the matter as a concern because the Commission reviews
projects and should be educated and alert to the landscape materials and
planting areas that are being approved to know what will work best.
Commissioner Tolstoy stated it is very evident when an inappropriate tree is
planted along a passe because only a few survive and many snap .off or lean
into adjacent yards. He said the Commission should not continue to require
those trees.
Mr. Buller said the task force on the tree preservation task force was set u~
because there were questions about preservation of existing windrows. He
thought the questions now being raised may dovetail with the work of the tree
preservation task force, but he felt that if Engineering and Public Works
proposed recommendations that might be ~eparated, they could proceed without
having to wait for the task force.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that he be replaced on the subcommittee by
Commissioner Vallette because of her keen interest in trees.
Commissioner Vallette was agreeable.
Commissioner Tolstoy remarked that Jeff Barnes and some of the other City
staff are very knowledgeable and he felt they would be able to generate some
good suggestions for the Commission's consideration.
Commissioner Melcher agreed that trees are being lost at an alarming rate
because of wind, homeowner neglect and abuse, and improper care by the
developer.
, , · , ,
Commissioner Chitlea remarked that the Von's Center at 19th and Carnelian had
severely pruned the trees in the parking lot down to twigs. She said the City
works hard to require tree planting programs so that the perking lots will be
shaded and the trees ere consistently over-pruned. She noted that the
planting area also has concrete up to the base of the tree which does not
leave any room for the trees to expend. She asked what could be done to stop
the abuse.
Planning Commis&ion Minutes
-19-
January 22, 1992
Mr. Bullet said that on newer centers a condition has been added to require
that trees be pruned only to the natural characteristic of the tree. He
stated that staff would contact the center even though that condition had not
been imposed.
Commissioner Malcher suggested that the developer be contacted. He said when
the center was new, he was contacted after every wind storm and told to
replace any lost trees. He indicated that the developer was working on the
Tetra Vista Village to replace the trees that were inappropriately removed.
Mr. Coleman stated that Scott Murphy was working on the Tetra Vista Village
tree problem. He indicated that staff has predicted that as newer commercial
centers develop, the older centers are losing tenants and customers. He said
that one of the reactions is to point fingers at problems and suggest that
signs are not visible, so trees are removed or severely pruned, further
accelerating the decline of the center.
, , , ,
Chairman McNiel asked what items the Commissioners would like to see addressed
at the joint City Council/Planning Co~enission workshop.
Commissioner Melcher suggested there be discussion on the Council's ideas
regarding policy on housing mix and housing quality. Me also felt the
Commission's responsibility on City projects should be discussed. Me felt
that the Planning Commission has a responsibility to consider the design on
the inside of the building as well as on the outside on City projects, because
he felt the inside is part of the public environment. Me said he felt
extremely handicapped in reviewing the library
Chairman McNiel stated a large library subcommittee was formed to design the
building. Me said the building had been expanded through the process.
Commissioner Melcher stated he was concerned about the physical character of
the building. He wondered what type of spaces were being created.
Commissioner Chitlea observed that when the interior use needs of the fire
station were explained to the Commission, the Commission was able to suggest
changes which were beneficial to the station. She suggested the Commission
should be permitted to have a little more input earlier in the process.
Chairman McNiel stated that the Friends of the Library and the County
Librarian were heavily involved in the interior design. He said that people
tend to be ver3[ territorial.
Commissioner Melcher suggested that City staff does not have the expertise to
assess what the consultants suggest regarding buildings. He felt the Planning
Commission is heavily involved in reviewing buildings and he thought the
Commission could make a valuable contribution.
Commissioner Vallette suggested that the Joint Workshop discuss Route 30.
Planning Commission Minutes -20- January 22, 1992
Chairman McNiel agreed it may be advantageous to discuss Route 30.
Mr. Bullet reiterated the subjects would be City policy vis-a-vis housing mix
and housing quality, Commission responsibility on City projects, Route 30, and
status of the Regional mall.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no additional public comments.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Vallette, unanimously carried to
adjourn.
9:45 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned to a joint City Council/Planning
Commission workshop on January 29, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. in the Rains Room.
Respectfully submitted,
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -21- January 22, 1992