Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout100798 PC Minutes << . . ~ . . MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 7,1998 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in an adjourned regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, October 7, 1998, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Guerriero, Naggar, Soltysiak, Webster, and Chairwoman Slaven. Absent: None. Also Present: Planning Manager Ubnoske, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Attomey Curley, Senior Planner Fagan, Assistant Planner Anders, and Minute Clerk Hansen. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Aaenda Chairwoman Slaven recommended changing the order of the items on the agenda, to accommodate public hearing items as follows: Agenda Item NO.8 was noted that the applicant was requesting a continuance, and Agenda Item NO.9 be heard prior to Items 4, 5, 6, and 7. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the agenda, as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 2. Approval of Minutes - AUQust 5. 1998, and AUQust 19. 1998 MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the August 5, 1998, Planning Commission minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. MOTION: Commissioner Guerriero moved to approve the August 19, 1998, Planning Commission minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Naggar and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 7 . . . 3. Director's Hearina Update Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified that although the agenda material incorrectly indicated that Planning Application No. PA98-0351 as approved, it has been continued. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8. PlanninQ Application NO. PA95-0079 (Tentative Parcel Map No. 28357} A request to subdivide 2.85 acres into four (4) residential parcels. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission continue the request. Chairwoman Slaven noted there were no requests to speak. The matter was continued to the November 4, 1998, Planning Commission meeting. 9. Plannina Application No. PA97-0420 {Development Plan} A request to design, construct, and operate a senior care facility including a 121 unit assisted care facility building, a 141 unit senior apartment building, two medical office buildings total 27,700 sq. ft., an Alzheimer facility of 7,200 sq. ft., 69 independent care housing units with a detached clubhouse and pool, and associated parking and landscaping. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Assistant Planner Anders presented the staff report (of record); advised that the applicant conducted a community workshop January 10, 1998; that although the community was not opposed to the project, their primary concern was increase in traffic; noted that for the record, staff received 12 phone calls -- 6 in opposition, 6 in support, and 4 letters - 1 in opposition, 3 in support; clarified that the developer will be installing the signal at Pala Road and Loma Linda Road for a Development Impact Fee credit, and construct road improvements on Pala Road, Loma Linda Road, and Temecula Lane - the improvements conditioned upon a Certificate of Occupancy; advised that the applicant has requested flexibility with regard to changing the unit mix, floor plans, and square footages as the market dictates (per Condition No.9); commented that as to landscaping, the project far exceeds the landscape requirements; and noted that staff recommends, for visual interest, additional color trim. With regard to the construction of bus bays, Deputy Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified for Commissioner Naggar Condition No. 61. 2 . . For Commissioners Slaven and Naggar, Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified the issue of safety services, including the proposed fire station plans. Assistant Planner Anders clarified, for Commissioner Naggar, with regard to the applicant's request for flexibility, that this request encompasses modifying size and unit mix, not a change in unit count. With regard to Condition No. 67, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised, for Commissioner Webster, that if it is the Commission's desire to condition this project to the completion of the Pala Bridge Project additional clarification of the condition would be needed. He further noted that the City is on schedule for completion of this project for December of 1999. Addressing hazardous materials, Commissioner Guerriero recommended that additional language be added to specifically address the above-ground, or underground storage of gas cylinders. For Chairwoman Slaven, Assistant Planner Anders clarified that the road improvements will be completed before stage one of occupancy on the project. With regard to signalization at Pala Road and Loma Linda Road, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified the City's intent to install the signal prior to June, 1999, advising that the purpose of coordinating the signalization with the developer is to preclude the developer, at a later point in time, having to modify an existing signal. With regard to the flood plain issue, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified the mitigating design measure; further clarified as to Conditions No. 45, and No. 50, noting that if the project were able to prevent any additional runoff into the channel, no additional improvements will be necessary. Mr. Larry Markham, architect representing the applicant, commended staff and Assistant Planner Anders on the excellent work done; clarified, in detail, the road improvements in the area of the project site; noted the construction cycle for occupancy as 12 to 18 months; as to Condition No. 67, agreed with the aforementioned amendment; voiced no objection to specified disclosure of the compressed gas cylinders; and addressed flood plain issues, clarifying the intent was to not divert or increase any flows. For Commissioner Webster, with regard to the installation of the Pala Road traffic signal, clarified that although the projected time-frame for construction was late 1999, the applicant would be willing to accelerate the project as directed by the City Council; for Commissioner Naggar, addressed the property the development has dedicated for use at the Pala Road improvement, if deemed necessary; for Commissioner Soltysiak, with regard to Condition No. 93, clarified the development's (Quimby) park land requirements, specifically applying a 50% credit for provided on-site amenities; for Chairwoman Slaven, clarified the retention basin, specifically the collector sites for interior drainage at the northwest and southwest corners of the project. Mr. Brian Sesko, the applicant, addressed for the Commission the construction timing and overall project plan; clarified the traffic light conditions at Loma Linda; addressed market conditions dictating the construction's initial direction, thereby requiring flexibility; for Chairwoman Slaven, advised that he was agreeable to additional color being added to the trim; for Commissioner Naggar, noted that the medical facility would begin the construction process once the first phase reached a 75-80% occupancy; for Commissioner Soltysiak, specified the project is fenced and gated with wrought iron, noting that at Loma Linda Road there is existing fencing, and at Pala Road there is a concrete wall. 3 . . Sally Krefft, 30933 Loma Linda, stated that her primary concern regarding the project was traffic, and submitted, for the record, a letter to the Commission dated October 7, 1998. Commissioners Naggar and Guerriero commended the project. Chairwoman Slaven expressed her desire to continue the discussion of traffic at the hearings, making the public aware of the on-going mitigation measures currently in process and the efforts of the City to deal with traffic problems. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to close the public hearing; to adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA97-0420; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA97-0420; and adopt Resolution No. 98-035 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, public testimony received at the public hearing, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, amended as follows: RESOLUTION NO. PC 98-035 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-0420 (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A SENIOR CARE FACILITY CONSISTING OF A 121 UNIT ASSISTED CARE FACILITY BUILDING, A 141 UNIT SENIOR APARTMENT BUILDING, TWO MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 27,700 SQUARE FEET, AN ALZHEIMER'S FACILITY OF 7,200 SQUARE FEET, 69 INDEPENDENT CARE HOUSING UNITS WITH A DETACHED CLUBHOUSE AND POOL (380,859 TOTAL SQUARE FEET) WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 22.62 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOMA LINDA AND PALA ROADS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. S 950-110-007 AND 950-110-008. Add for Condition No. 10, additional non-monochromatic (not gray or white) color added to trim, as per staff's recommendation for Condition No. 67, add an additional Item e. to the condition, conditioning the project's Certificate of Occupancy to the completion of the Pala Bridge Project for Condition No. 72, additional language be added, specifically addressing the storage of gas cylinders for Condition No. 93, regarding Quimby requirements, to add language to include a 50% credit for the development's park land requirements for on-site amenities provided, per memorandum regarding clarification of Conditions of approval submitted by Community Services, dated October 5, 1998 The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice reflected unanimous vote approval. At 7:38 P.M. a short recess was taken, and the meeting was reconvened at 7:46 P.M. 4 . . Chairwoman Slaven recommended to discuss Agenda Item NO.7 out of order; there was voiced no objection. 7. FindinQ of Public Convenience or Necessity for Quick Stop Market on Rancho California Road and Lvndie Lane Planning Manager Ubnoske advised that the applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission make a public convenience or necessity find in order to sell liquor and clarified that the market currently sells beer and wine. In an effort to eliminate travel time for his customers, Mr. Ibrahim D. Ibrahim, the applicant, stated that he would like to provide alcohol to his customers for their convenience; noted, for security concerns, his hours of operation would be from 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. weekdays and to 11 :00 P.M. weekends. With regard to Commissio'ner Naggar's querying as to where the criteria questionnaire originated (in the staff report), Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified that in the past, staff, with the help of the City Attorney, drafted this to help justify the criteria for making a finding. With regard to Commissioner Naggar's referencing the first two questions and responses of the questionnaire, Attorney Curley advised that the Commission review the criteria in a general geographical sense, rather than subclassification as to race, color, or creed and advised that the questionnaire would be reviewed. For Commissioner Naggar, in regard to querying whether the inclusion of hard liquor would contribute to law enforcement problems, Commissioner Guerriero advised that from a law enforcement standpoint, liquor stores have in other areas contributed to increased crime. Mr. Guerriero questioned the rationale for additional alcoholic establishments in light of the School District's on-going efforts to promote on anti-drug and anti-alcohol campaigns as well as those efforts of law enforcement to combat alcohol-related problems. As to creating a proliferation of alcoholic businesses, it was noted that that while not wanting to deprive any businessman's livelihood, it was the Commission's quest to preserve the public's best interest, as to health, safety, and welfare. Commissioner Naggar advised that due to the close proximity of the existing uses providing alcoholic accessibility (located east of the major intersection at Rancho California Road and Ynez Road -- Albertson's and Sav-On) and since there were no boundaries or barriers (i.e., hills, rivers, freeways), it was noted that separating this use from other aforementioned existing uses would not be justification in a finding of convenience. In contrast, Commissioner Webster, with respect to boundaries, viewed Rancho California Road as a major road and, therefore, viewed this as a barrier which would substantiate as a finding of convenience. In light of the applicant's response to Question NO.7 of the questionnaire (that there are no convenience establishments within a quarter mile of the proposed establishment) would also qualify as a finding of convenience. 5 . . With regard to Question No. 7 of the questionnaire, Commissioner Soltysiak advised that the question querying if there is a proliferation of licensed establishments doesn't constitute solely convenience establishments. Mr. Soltysiak commented that since the other criteria is somewhat vague and subjective, in the past when such uses were brought before the Commission, a map was provided noting current existing licensed establishments providing pertinent analysis for establishing whether or not there exists a proliferation of such uses. For Commissioner Soltysiak, Planning Manager Ubnoske noted that staff wasn't currently aware of the number of such licensed establishments existing within a quarter mile of this establishment; clarified that it has been established there is an overconcentration of such existing uses in the area and most of Riverside County; and clarified that the primary issue is deciding whether or not there is a finding of convenience or necessity. With regard to Commissioner Naggar's question, Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified that the Commission's decision is appealable to the City Council; as to further clarification, Attorney Curley advised that typically ABC views an approval by the City's goveming body as establishing no adverse impact on the local environment. Although there might be grounds for disapproval later, he noted that the approval by the City provides a gateway for further process. For Commissioner Soltysiak, Planning Manager advised that this application, for this particular establishment, will most likely not be readdressed by the Commission at a future meeting, due to the fact that Mr. Ibrahim was currently in escrow and that his determination was contingent on the Commission's action this evening. Commission Webster would like the record to clearly reflect his opposition with the general consensus of the Commission. Following lengthy discussion, based on the analysis and findings provided, Chairwoman Slaven reiterated the Commissioners' comments, stating it was the general consensus of the Planning Commission to have made no finding of public convenience or necessity, due to the following criteria: that there was no qualifying unique feature, clarifying that unique usually encompassed an entertainment-type use or special service-type use that the proposed addition of liquor at this location could increase law enforcement problems that there were sensitive uses in the vicinity of the area, such as: churches and preschools that, with regard to the use catering to an under-served population, and any geographical boundary, or barrier separating this use from other licensed establishments, the Commission noted that the use already sells beer and wine; determined that the known, existing licensed establishments provide easily accessible and ample provision to the public it was not the intent of the Commission to promote an overly dense saturation of such uses 6 . . At this point the hearing went back to the regular order of the Agenda. 4. Approve the twenty-seven foot 127'1 hiQh free-standinQ sian for The Promenade in Temecula lPA98-03701 By way of overheads, Senior Planner Fagan presented the sign elevation and location; noted that the proposed sign is consistent with the design of the mall; for Commissioner Webster noted that although there are other off-site signs, this will be the only primary entry sign, pursuant to Section 111. C 11 (Development Standard, On-Site Signs) of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan; for Commissioner Naggar, commented that this sign far exceeds the size of a housing tract sign; and for Commissioner Soltysiak, advised that the material of the sign has been designed to be low- maintenance. Commissioner Webster commended staff on their efforts with the design of a 27' sign versus the allowable 36'. Commissioner Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Naggar, expressed dissatisfaction with the design, desirous of more provision for visual interest, recommending addition of stucco, brick or rock. Mr. Tom Gruber of KA, Inc., architecture representing the applicant, noted that the original intent was to keep the design light and airy. For Commissioners Soltysiak and Naggar, Mr. Gruber clarified that the sign is basically a painted metal structure, noting that the letters are internally illuminated at night; and advised that the design could incorporate a stone base. The consensus of the Planning Commission was disapproval of the comer monumentation located at the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. Chairwoman Slaven recommended bringing back to the Commission a new revision. Senior Planner Fagan reiterated the Commission's comments, as follows: that the base of the sign be enhanced, and that on the two support structures, additional articulation with stucco application. For Chairwoman Slaven, Planning Manager Ubnoske recommended bringing back to the Commission the elevations of approved projects and entries of the Mall to reorient the Commission, to provide a basis for a finding of consistency. Chairwoman Slaven further advised, for visual interest, some softening affect, not solely metal. 5. Review and approve the corner monumentation located at the southwest corner of Winchester and MarQarita Roads: review the three options for the corner monumentation located at the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads; and provide direction to staff reaardinQ the preferred option for the corner monumentation located at the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. l:PA98-03691 By way of color renderings, Senior Planner Fagan presented the options for the corner monumentations. 7 . . Mr. Steve Schafenacker, representing the applicant, noted for Chairwoman Slaven that Forest Hills will turn this project over for construction to the Power Center Developers after tonight's direction on the design phase; and clarified that the material of the sign was painted metal and the base is stone, although incorrectly indicated as block wall in the staff report. Senior Planner Fagan clarified for Commissioner Soltysiak that it was the intent to bring general option designs to the Commission for input regarding details, such as colors and materials. Chairwoman Slaven recommended more detail with regard to landscaping, and to provide a rendering representing the exact landscape plan. Commissioner Webster recommended the addition of a stone veneer or some other type of material, rather than just metal. In regard to the description of the wall panel, Commissioner Soltysiak recommended clarification in the language, commenting it was too vague. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks recommended bringing the site plan back to the Commission to clarify how the monumentation relates to the corridor, assuring the view was not blocked. As to the Developer's time constraints, the applicant clarified that the Design Guidelines had precedence over the monument signs at the corners. It was the consensus of the Commission, after review, to not approve the corner monumentations located at the southwest corner of Winchester and Margarita Roads and at the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. Senior Planner Fagan clarified that he was clear of the direction the Commission wanted to go. Chairwoman Slaven advised bringing the project back to the Commission with additional information and detail. 6. Review Plannina Application No. PA-0371 {Development Planl- Desian Guidelines; and approve Plannina Application No. PA98-0371 {Development Planl - Desian Guidelines. Senior Planner Fagan presented the Design Guidelines (per agenda material). With regard to Section B, under Site Access and Traffic Flow, specifically drive-through facilities, Senior Planner Fagan clarified, for Commissioner Webster, each Center's distinct components; and further noted that as to the Village Center Overlay, the Specific Plan takes precedence, which applies at this site. With regard to Section C, under Site Parking, Senior Planner Fagan clarified, for Commissioner, Guerriero the rationale for the 90 degree parking, instead of angled-parking; and noted, for Chairwoman Slaven, the 9-foot parking space does allow for double-striping. 8 . . With regard to Section D, under Site Paving, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified asphalt paving for Commissioner Guerriero; as to colored-paving at each entrance, Senior Planner Fagan advised, for Commissioner Soltysiak, that earth tones could be added into the pallet, that language could be added for clarification, as to entries, further clarifying that this section could be moved to Section H, under Entrances. With regard to Section F, Site Utilities, Chairwoman Slaven commended the Design Guidelines for rendering all utilities underground. With regard to Section H, under Materials and Colors, Senior Planner Fagan clarified, for Chairwoman Slaven, the intent of the guidelines to have the main entrance on the front, facing the street; under Architectural Design and Entrances, Mr. Steve Schafenacker, representing the applicant, recommended for, Commissioner Guerriero, the following language modification must adhere in paragraph one and then the term should for consistency with The Promenade in Temecula and in the second paragraph reflected an element of flexibility the development needed for such uses where deemed appropriate by staff (i.e., a gas station). Planning Manager Ubnoske further clarified that the language can be strengthened for consistency, leaving room for flexibility where it is warranted. With regard to the Outlot Sign Criteria Section, Senior Planner Fagan advised, for Commissioner Webster, that permitting four signs was typical, one per side of the building, and consistent with the Specific Plan; clarified, for Commissioner Guerriero, as to the size of the signs, that the 30% of the length and height of the facade of the building, was consistent with the Specific Plan; and as to neon signs, Mr. Shafenacker assured Chairwoman Slaven that the mall wouldn't be devaluated by obtrusive neon lights, clarifying that the neon-signing could be constructed in a tasteful manner. With regard to the Landscaping Section, Commissioner Webster advised that since the parking lot landscaping requirement was 50 percent of the parking stall when the trees reach maturity, the use of an alternative tree, rather than the Eucalyptus tree would be more effective; Senior Planner Fagan, for Commissioner Soltysiak, clarified the rationale for the landscaping being different in monument areas in order to create distinction, further advised that the language could be clarified to reflect minor entry statements or landscaping, instead of the word monument and Mr. Shafenacker clarified that the minor entries would be constructed by the outlot developer. With the aforementioned recommendations, it was the consensus of the Commission to approve Planning Application No. 98-0371 (Development Plan)- Design Guidelines. 7. Findina of Public Convenience or Necessity for Stop Quick Market on Rancho California and Lyndie Lane. This Agenda Item was heard out of order, see page 5. 8. PlanninQ Application No. PA95-0079 {Tentative Parcel Map No. 282571 This Agenda Item was heard out of order, see page 2. 9. Plannina Application No. PA97-0420 {Development Planl This Agenda Item was heard out of order, see page 2. 9 . . PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT Planning Manager Ubnoske advised that the Recreational Vehicle Briefing would be postponed. A. Planning Manager Ubnoske clarified the Commission will be receiving a new initial study in the agenda packets, reflecting the same information but written more concisely with a different format. B. In response to Commissioner Naggar's comments at the September 2, 1998, Planning Commission meeting, Ms. Ubnoske relayed that the rationale for not televising the Planning Commission meeting was primarily a matter of cost and the contract requirements. C. After Agenda Item No.7, Ms. Ubnoske commented that the applicant stated that he had already obtained a license from ABC and paid $12,000 for it, clarifying that she would further investigate ABC's process. COMMISSIONER REPORTS A. Commissioner Naggar referenced an article from "The Californian," of September 25, 1998, regarding the crosswalk east of Moraga Road and Margarita Road, addressing the danger involved for children at this unsignalized crosswalk. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks suggested that Mr. Naggar write his comments in letter-fonn to the Traffic Commission in order to have the matter addressed, clarifying he would then be notified of the hearing when the subject will be heard. The Commission recommended Commissioner Naggar attend that meeting as an informational representative. ADJOURNMENT At 10:02 P.M. Chairwoman Slaven formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesday, October 21, 1998, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ~~ Mar a Slaven, Cl'ialrwoman J~~' w~~ Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager 10