Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-01-07 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting – November 1, 2007 - 5:30 p.m. Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Andrews, McGinnis, Stanley, Tragish, Tkac Absent: None 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS: Mr. Ramon Hendricks, principal at Stockdale High School, stated he is concerned about the proposed development and traffic at the intersection. He stated that he is further concerned with his drop off areas as Buena Vista widens to 6 lanes and the potential for consumption of alcohol. Mr. Hendricks stated that he spoke with police officers and has found that there are no other school sites that have a development such as the one being proposed directly across the street from a high school. He pointed out that those schools that have these types of developments near them have to call the police constantly to mediate situations between students, former students and/or young adults. Mr. Hendricks stated that this development has the potential to tempt high school children to not attend class. He stated that the high school district recommends that the Planning Commission approve this neighborhood to be a C-1 zone, which would include businesses that the school believes could live with comfortably without a lot of student interaction or additional traffic. Christy Burke stated that she is a parent of a Stockdale student, a resident of Seven Oaks and the Director of Children’s Ministry at John’s Lutheran Church a few miles south of the proposed site. She stated that she is vehemently opposed to this, especially with concerns for the traffic and safety issues. Doris Campa stated she lives in the neighborhood of the proposed development and stated she is against the zone change as there would be serious consequences for the neighborhoods and the school. She pointed out that rezoning to C-2 does not fit into the surrounding community. She also commented that traffic in this area is already a concern and will only be an increased concern with approval of this project. She said that C-1 would be more amenable to the area. Ms. Campa stated that she had signatures from parents in the area that area opposed to this zone change. Philip Negle, a resident of 1149 Westerham Court, which is catty-corner from this development. He advised that the purpose of a C-1 zone is to provide an adequate variation of retail establishment and services that conveniently serve the needs of the residents in the immediate neighborhood. He went on to state that it is highly desirable to blend uses into the area thereby protecting the residential character of the area, but not create architectural or traffic conflicts and not permit the commercial development to expand into a regional center of such scope and variety as to attract significant volumes of traffic from outside the neighborhood. Mr. Negle went on to explain that the C-1 zone includes automobile services, bakery, books, stationary stores, candy stores, Christmas tree sales, churches, cosmetic stores, drug stores, fabric yardage stores, florist, etc. Mr. Negle continued on to point out that the request to re-zone to a C-2 changes the locality from a simple neighborhood location to a regional location, and by definition, C-2 is a regional commercial zone, unless otherwise provided in this title, the purpose of this zone is to permit development of concentrated large scale retail operations providing a broad range of goods and services which serve the Metropolitan market. Mr. Negle questioned where the neighborhood went. He pointed out that the list of stores allowed under C-2 are extremely damning to the situation and include adult entertainment, apparel and accessory stores, appliance stores, automobile accessory stores, dealerships, rental agencies, bowling centers, camera, card rooms, carpet and upholstery cleaners, car wash detailing, computers and computer stores, farmer’s market, floor covering, funeral services, furniture stores, garage for public or commercial parking, gift, novelty and souvenir stores, hardware stores, hobby stores, home furnishing, hospital, sanitariums, hotel, motel, including restaurants, bars and Planning Commission – November 1, 2007 Page 2 cocktail lounges, provided they are incidental to the main use, luggage and leather goods, military surplus stores, motion picture theatres, motorcycle dealerships, musical instrument store, nursery, paint, glass and wallpaper stores, pool and spa sales, radio & television and other consumer electronic stores and record, tape and pre-recorded music. Mr. Negle concluded by stating that according to the duties of the Planning Commission, it indicates they are present to make recommendations for improvement of the neighborhood. He stated that he cannot see a C-2 zoning being an improvement to the subject neighborhood or to the General Plan. Gordon Nipp representing the Sierra Club invited everyone to a talk on the future of our society th Wednesday, November 14 by James Howard Kinsler, who is a fierce proponent of new urbanism. Blaine Franzen, lives at 3505 Via Rosa, behind the proposed Mustang Square. He stated that apparently the EIR commented that the drive-thrus would have no impact, or very little impact, on the air quality. He stated that he observed at least six cars sitting at each drive-thru on his way home and they were constantly idling. He questioned how that could not impact the air quality. He stated that everyone else has stated concerns that he mentioned in his letter. Olivia Franzen stated that she is trying to save her neighborhood. She stated that she is concerned with the pollution. She suggested no drive-thrus and no alcohol. Maria Lordas Nichol a resident of the subject area and stated she thinks the message has been loud and clear as to the impact the traffic would have in this area. She also stated that she is concerned with her daughter walking to school every day. Ms. Nichol referred to a Bill that provides for healthier lunches for kids, only to have drive-thrus put in right across the street from the school. She also stated that she is concerned with loitering. With respect to the car wash, she stated that it is her understanding that the only way there can be a car wash is if it is re-zoned to C-2. She pointed out that no one has asked what the community’s needs are, so the developer is not providing a need. Bruce Morro stated he resides on Via Capia and expressed his concern and opposition to the zoning change because of its proximity to the school. He urged the Planning Commission to vote no on this item. Commissioner Tkac stated that with regard to 5.1a and 5.1b he reviewed the previous hearing on these items. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items 4.1a Approval of minutes for Planning Commission regular meeting of October 4, 2007. Commissioner Tkac moved, seconded by Commissioner Andrews, to approve the October 4, 2007 Minutes. Motion unanimously carried by group vote. 4.2 Public Hearing Items 4.2a Approval of Continuance of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6465 to November 15, 2007 (New Vision Civil Engineering, Inc.) 4.2b Approval of Continuance of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6760 to November 15, 2007 (McIntosh & Associates) The public hearing is opened. No one from the audience of the Planning Commission requested removal of any consent item. Planning Commission – November 1, 2007 Page 3 Commissioner Tkac moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the public consent calendar. Motion unanimously carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Andrews, McGinnis, Stanley, Tragish, Tkac NOES: None 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS – Zone Change / Planned Development Review / Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 5.1a Zone Change 06-1149 (Cannon & Associates) 5.1b Planned Development Review 07-1558 (Cannon & Associates) Staff report given. Commissioner Johnson commented that his major issue is the on-site consumption of alcohol that would be allowed in a C-2 zone. He confirmed with Staff that alcohol consumption is not allowed in a C-1 zone. He inquired if there is a scenario where on-site alcohol consumption could occur. Staff responded they would need a CUP in a C-1 zone. Commissioner Johnson commented that whether there is a C-2 or C-1 there really is no change and his concerns regarding alcohol consumption have been addressed. Commissioner Johnson inquired if there is a zoning ordinance that would restrict adult entertainment under a C-2 for this area. Staff responded in the affirmative, advising that there is a 1000-foot setback under Ordinance Section 1769 from a school and a 1000-foot setback for those businesses next to residential areas. Commissioner Tragish stated he thought Mr. Franzen’s comments were interesting. He responded to the notion that the Planning Commission was allowing Mr. Carosella to fix things instead of denying it on the spot, by commenting that he takes offense to this allegation because the Commissioners work very hard to be fair and balance all of the interests of the public and the developer in making decisions. Commissioner Tragish pointed out that the developers take a lot of risk and spend a lot of money to do these projects and if it doesn’t work they take a big hit and therefore when the applicant is before the Planning Commission they are entitled to receive the consideration of the Commissioners. Commissioner Tragish referenced comments by Mr. Franzen, and advised that during conversations with Mr. Carosella he sees an individual who is trying to meet the objections of the Commission, and yet Mr. Franzen doesn’t want the Planning Commission to give Mr. Carosella an opportunity to meet the objections. He further pointed out that there are many instances when the homeowners have wanted a continuance to work things out and the Planning Commission has given the homeowners that opportunity. Commissioner Tragish thanked Mr. Carosella for his cooperation. He commented that he agrees with the treatment of on-site alcohol consumption under C-1. He inquired if under C-1 off-site liquor sales are permitted, to which Staff responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Tragish inquired if the C-1 zoning was present on the subject property before the school was built, to which Staff responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Tragish further inquired if C-2 zoning was before the Planning Commission about a month ago on the Castle & Cooke property to the SW of this subject project, to which Staff responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Tragish pointed out that Castle & Cooke can do the same thing and have the same opportunities to put in drive-thrus and on-site liquor sales. Commissioner Tragish responded to Mr. Hendricks’s comments about having a regional shopping center near a school pointing out that there already is regional zoning across the street with Castle & Cooke. Planning Commission – November 1, 2007 Page 4 Commissioner Tragish inquired about the height of buildings in a C-2 zone being higher than those in a C-1 zone. Commissioner Tragish inquired as to the height of the car wash. Staff responded that the wall adjacent to the south would be 8’ and the wall on the east side of the project would also be 8’. Commissioner Tragish inquired if there is a 10’ wall on this project, to which Staff responded in the negative, pointing out that in the past the residents didn’t like 10’ walls. Commissioner Tragish inquired if the building structure of the car wash will be higher than the wall to the south. Staff responded that it will be higher and that is the reason it has so much sound attenuation on the structure itself. Commissioner Tragish stated that he still has some reservations with regard to the traffic issues, as well as to the aggressiveness of the project, even with the understanding that if the C-1 were to remain it will still pose the same problems that many of the people have come forward with as concerns. He further stated that he is concerned with the lighting from the car wash. Commissioner Tragish commented that he did receive a telephone call from Mr. Carosella, as well as a Linda French who he thinks is a neighbor. He also stated that he received a call from a Mr. Bruce Friedman. Commissioner McGinnis commented that he did speak with Mr. Carosella on the telephone regarding some questions he had with the project. He stated that the owner of the car wash will be on-site and will be responsible for keeping the noise down. He stated that there are only two uses that are not permitted under a C-1 that he could put in under C-2, which include a car wash and drive-thru restaurants and the applicant, under a C-2, has agreed to limit the number of drive-thrus to two restaurants. Commissioner McGinnis commented that he thinks the applicant has made every effort possible. He stated that he thinks traffic is already an issue in this area and doesn’t think this project will make another catastrophe in this area that is already heavily traveled. Commissioner McGinnis stated that he will be supporting the applicant. Commissioner Tkac stated he has some of the same concerns as the other Commissioners. He inquired if a major 3 is allowed on this project, to which Staff responded that major 3, the large box, does not have a specific use for yet, however, it could be split up into smaller tenant in-fills, or it could be occupied by one large store. Commissioner Tkac inquired what building could be compared to the 33,200 sq. ft. major 3. Staff responded that it is about 20,000 feet less than a standard Albertsons market, pointing out that it would be bigger than a Wal-Greens. Commissioner Tkac referenced the Valencia/New Hall area commenting on how they’ve really made their drive-thrus look nice. He stated that he would like to move the location of the Wal- Greens. He also pointed out that he thinks the high school didn’t build the parking appropriately. Commissioner Tkac stated that he is not so concerned with the consumption of alcohol and he referenced what law enforcement is doing to stop kids from buying alcohol. He also stated that he likes the car wash. He further commented that with Castle & Cooke developing across the street he thinks this applicant will want to keep up the image at his location as well. Commissioner Tkac stated that with regard to traffic he doesn’t love it, however if they could fix the Stockdale problem a lot of this would go away because the area is going to get busier as evidenced by the size of the roads. He also stated that he is concerned with the lighting, but thinks the applicant will be sensitive to the neighbors with regard to this. Commissioner Tkac inquired if there is a map of the C-1 and C-2 that is in the vicinity. Staff responded that currently there is no commercial within a mile of this particular site. Commissioner Tkac inquired how big Castle & Cook’s C-2 development will be in comparison to this applicant’s development. Staff responded that this current site is a little less than 11 acres, and Castle & Cooke’s development is about 8 or 9 acres in size. Commissioner Stanley disclosed that he spoke with the applicant on this issue, and appreciates the fact that a lot of concerns raised in the previous meeting have been addressed. He commented that the alcohol issue and the loading hours have been addressed, as well as having more noise suppression and also reducing the drive-thrus from three to two. He stated that this looks like a good project. Planning Commission – November 1, 2007 Page 5 Commissioner Andrews disclosed that he did have a discussion with the developer in this project and his major concerns were addressing the issues of the school and whether it is a closed campus. He also stated that the applicant has proposed some additional sound-deadening material and panels to address the noise concerns, as well as reducing the number of drive- thrus. Commissioner Blockley stated that he spoke with the developer and has reviewed the list of concessions. He stated that he appreciates the efforts that have been made to reduce the impact the project will have on the neighborhood. He stated that this project is at the intersection of two arterials. Commissioner Blockley said that this property has been zoned for commercial for a very long time. He stated that he will support this. Commissioner Tragish inquired if in a C-1 zoning a CUP is required for a drive-thru. Staff responded that in a C-1, if it is a restaurant that wants a drive-thru it would need a CUP, however, if it’s a bank or pharmacy they can have a drive-thru by right. Commissioner Johnson stated that he spoke with the applicant. He inquired of Staff what the residents could do if there was a problem with lighting. Staff responded that the residents can contact Code Enforcement in the Building Department if lighting is a problem. Commissioner Johnson inquired what the process is to obtain a CUP for on-site alcohol sale. Staff responded that a CUP does require an advertised public hearing before a different governmental body, which allows for public input and any decision made can be appealed to City Council. Commissioner Johnson inquired that since the CUP hearing is before another body, how do they ensure that the CUP board would really understand the Planning Commissioners’ concerns with regard to the sale of on-site alcohol. Staff responded that Staff pulls out historical files on a site to look at all the conditions of approval and they would notice, on this particular C-2 zone, something different than they would normally see, which is a requirement for a CUP for on- site sales of alcohol. Therefore, Staff would wonder why there is a CUP requirement on this project and right away understand that there must have been some special concerns, which they would then typically go to the Minutes of the hearing and look into it and see what issues were brought up at that time, noting that the school spoke and that the commissioners had concerns. Commissioner Blockley inquired about Condition number 4d with respect to restrictions on parking lot lighting, including height of the fixture not exceeding 15’, glare shields and baffles and if they are more stringent than the normal building development regulations. Staff responded this is typical of their current lighting requirements. Commissioner Johnson inquired if the October 16, 2007 memo from Mr. Movius is moot. Staff suggested reading the motion on page 2 of the November 1, 2007 memo from Planning. Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Andrews, to approve the negative Declaration, and approve the Zone Change 06-1149 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached revised Resolution dated November 1, 2007 and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Andrews, McGinnis, Stanley NOES: Commissioners Tragish, Tkac Commissioner Tragish stated that his no vote is because he thinks the project is still somewhat intrusive and is at a higher level than was anticipated for that particular location. He stated that whether it’s a C-1 without a PCD he does not see a problem with it because there are ordinances regarding lighting that apply whether it’s a C-2 or C-1. The parking and design requirements are the same. He also pointed out that there is a signage ordinance, as well as off-site liquor whether it’s C-1 or C-2 and the on-site sale of liquor is the same with a CUP. He stated that with regard to drive-thrus with a C-1 the applicant has to go through a CUP process to get the approval for a drive-thru. Commissioner Tragish stated that he thinks the C-1 is less intrusive Planning Commission – November 1, 2007 Page 6 and there will not be a car wash situation. He also stated that he has substantial concerns regarding traffic at that intersection and thinks that C-1 is just fine for that location across the street from the school. Commissioner Tkac stated that he would like to have this remain C-1, and would like to have more control over those issues he raised previously. He stated that traffic is his biggest concern. Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Andrews, to approve Plan Development Review 07-1558 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached revised Resolution dated November 1, 2007, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Andrews, McGinnis, Stanley NOES: Commissioners Tragish, Tkac Commissioner Tragish incorporated his previous comments from the last motion into this motion. Commissioner Tkac incorporated his previous comments from the last motion into this motion. Commissioner Tkac also stated that he did speak with Mr. Carosella. 5.2 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6465 (New Vision Civil Engineering, Inc.) Heard on consent calendar. 5.3Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6760 (McIntosh & Associates) Heard on consent calendar. 6. COMMUNICATIONS: None. 7. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Johnson inquired as to a new staff face in the audience. Staff responded that it is Steve Teglia from the City Manager’s Office working as an Administrative Analyst. 8. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further comments, the meeting was adjourned at 6:59 p.m. Robin Gessner, Recording Secretary JAMES D. MOVIUS, Secretary Planning Director