Loading...
12/18/2008 i Community and Economic Development Department (ALIFORNIA GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 18,2008 The resular meetins of the Grand Terrace Plannina Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center. 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on DECEMBER 18,2008 at 7:00 P.m.,by Chairman Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairperson Tom Comstock, Commissioner Darcy McNaboe, Commissioner Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development Director Sandra Molina, Senior Planner Jerina Cordova, Planning Secretary Richard Shields, Building and Safety Director Craig Neustaedter, Consultant Traffic Engineer ABSENT: Matthew Addington, Vice Chairperson Brian Phelps, Commissioner 7:00 P.M.: CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairman Wilson convened the. Site and Architecture Review Board/Planning Commission meeting. • Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Comstock • Roll Call • Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by the Chairman. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written request to be agendized to the Director of Community and Economic Development. 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • 909/ 824-6621 1 GENERAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: CHARLES HORNSBY 22656 Brentwood Street Mr. Hornsby addressed the Planning Commission with a question that was intended for the City Council regarding the City's Budget. CYNTHIA BIDNEY 12219 Pascal Street Ms. Bidney requested that the Planning Commission meetings be televised like the City Council meetings are. JEFF MCCONNELL Walnut Avenue Mr. McConnell offered his assistance with televising the Planning Commission Meetings. ITEMS: 1. MINUTES: Planning.Commission Meeting Minutes of November 20, 2008 RECOMMENDATION: Approval Commissioner Comstock made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner McNaboe addressed a concern with the minutes stating that Charles Hornsby comments were missing. Director Powers indicated that the meeting minutes were inaudible and that we will have to go back and look at their notes. She indicated that his comments were regarding the Senior Center. Commissioner Comstock withdrew his motion to approve. MOTION PC-23-2008 Motion to amend minutes and continue to 1/15/2009 3-0-2-0 Motion carries with .Vice Chair Addington and Commissioner Phelps absent 2. SA 08-09, CUP A proposal to redevelop approximately 3.6 acres of land by 08-05, TPM.08-02 demolishing existing structures, retaining a 6,900 square (TPM No. 19131), foot commercial building, and constructing a 24-hour Vacation of Right 14,820 square foot drug store with prescription pick up of Way, and E 08- window, a.24-hour 13,969 square foot grocery store, and a 03: 5,300 square foot multi-tenant restaurant. A portion of Britton Way is proposed to be vacated, but maintained as a private driveway. Associated parking, landscaping, and lighting will be constructed. Under the Tentative Parcel Map nine lots will be consolidated qualifying the project for . 2 development incentives. The project site is zoned Village Commercial within the Barton Road Specific Plan (BRSP) and Administrative Commercial. APPLICANT: Dr. Robert Ha LOCATION: Northwest corner of Barton Road and Mount Vernon Avenue, and northwest corner of Britton Way and Mount Vernon Avenue (Assessor's Parcel.Numbers 0275-251-14, 2127, 30, 31, 32, 55, 73 and 74) RECOMMENDATION: Conduct the public hearing; and move to adopt the attached resolution approving SA 08-09, CUP 08-09 and E 08-03, and recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 08-02 and the Vacation of a portion of Britton Way. Senior Planner Molina introduced the parties present as Dr. Robert Ha; David Leonard, David Leonard Associates; Carl Winter, LSA and Associates; Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director; and Craig Neustaedter, Consultant Traffic Engineer. Senior Planner Molina proceeded to present her staff report by way of power point(slides 2-24). Slide 2: Senior Planner Molina provided an aerial view of the parcel giving an overview of the project. The site falls in to two zone districts. The north is Administrative Professional and the South is BRSP Village Commercial. The project is in compliance with both zones. Slide 3: Second aerial photo of the surrounding area. Slide 4. Senior Planner Molina described the project as read on slide 4. The existing building will undergo re-fadade improvements. Slide 5: The project encompasses development incentives as permissible in the Barton Road Specific Plan. The parking is at 159 spaces and the landscaping is about 15% of the site. The BRSP gives the Planning Commission the authority to relax any development standards based upon the project and its merits. The Planning Commission must consider consolidation of existing lots, reduction of access points and/or reciprocal access agreements, reciprocal parking agreements, and provision of public or semi-public pedestrian open space. This project consolidates lots and is designed with the reciprocal access point with the property to the west. Slide 6: Applications that.were filed on the project were.Site and Architectural Review 08-09; Conditional Use Permit 08-05; Tentative Parcel Map 08-02; and Vacation of Right of Way Environmental 08-03. Slide 7. Site plan as included in the staff report packet. 3 Slides 8-14. Slides 8-14 are pictures of the site from multiple directions. Slide 15: The project has been reviewed for conformance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. General Commercial.and Office Commercial are the General Plan designations and the project is consistent with the noise"element, natural and visual resources as contained in the Resolution. Both the zoning of BRSP-VC & Administrative Professional allow for the uses that are proposed with the use of a Conditional Use Permit. Under the Zoning Code requirements, it calls for 188 parking'spaces but the applicant asked for a 12% reduction and he also asked that the landscaping be reduced to 15%. The Tentative Map meets the lot consolidation and area requirements of the BRSP and Zoning Code. Slide 16. This slide provides a site analysis of the project, as requested by one of the Planning Commissioners. A comparison of CVS was done as it is comparable in each requested reduction. Slide 17. The building design is mainly earth-toned, stucco, ledgestone wainscoting, ornamental metal work, medallions, wood trellises, metal arbors, and standing metal seam roofing all incorporated into the design. Senior Planner Molina addressed the Planning Commission with an issue of the roofing. They are proposing seamless metal roofing. The BRSP specifically does not allow corregated metal roofing. The applicant's position is that the seamless metal roofing would be more attractive, however, it is staff s position that in the BRSP there is a provision on metal roofing so if it were permitted there is potential to set a precedent. No where else in the BRSP have we seen metal roofing. There are some benefits to this type of roofing, it is more sturdy*and will last longer. It is a seamless roof and can be attractive but it will be a policy issue on what the Commission feels is appropriate to have in the BRSP. The BRSP guidelines allow the use of stucco with articulation on the walls. Slide 18-22: Various pictures of the proposed project and elevations. Slide 23: An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared, properly noticed and circulated for public comment for a period of 20 days. Staff did not receive any comments. Notice of this public hearing was posted and mailed to property owners within a 300-foot radius. Senior Planner Molina provided an overview of the environmental review for the project and indicated that' the Commission received the revised Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the access off of Barton Road, which is allowed by CEQA. 4 Slide 24. Provided staff s recommendation on the project that the Planning Commission conduct the Public Hearing and vote to approve the project and to make recommendations to the City Council regarding the tentative map. Commissioner McNaboe requested clarification on the delivery activities and hours that were included in the staff report. She stated that the staff report indicates that they were proposing delivery hours between 5:00 a.m. and midnight, however Staff is recommending restricting loading activities for all on-site uses to between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Senior Planner Molina stated that it is a condition of approval. She stated that it reads that the loading and unloading delivery activity shall be restricted to between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. for all uses on the site. So her interpretation is that no delivery activities will be allowed to occur between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Commissioner McNaboe indicated that the word to should be taken out of the sentence. She questioned if the access to the center allowing right in and right out, left in and left out proves to be an issue with traffic and proves to. be a dangerous situation what the process will be of changing it later. Building & Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that the City reserves the right in the conditions of approval to restudy that in the event that there is a traffic safety concern. Commissioner McNaboe questioned if that would be a periodic study or only if someone comes _ forward stating that it is a problem. Building & Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that it would be more hinged on if there were collisions on that drive-way. Chairman Wilson questioned if the traffic consultant is in concurrence with what was introduced by the applicant's consultant. Building & Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded in the affirmative. In fact Craig Neustaedter reviewed the Traffic Engineer's additional study on that particular drive-way. Chairman Wilson stated that because this is such a critical corner he would like to ensure that there is a concurrence with the Traffic Engineer on all the assumptions on this corner. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter responded that for a number of years he has been concerned about free and open access on Barton Road on the adjacent development. This is an issue that is going to get progressively worse over time. In fact in his own driving experiences it is becoming increasingly difficult to make left turns onto Barton Road from the driveways. So when this particular project came in we flagged this as an opportunity to institute a little bit more access control on Barton Road. He stated that he can't dispute anything that the consultant included in their letter, regardless, there is a potential that excess access on Barton Road is going to create a problem. He believes that staff has taken a good course of action in retaining the capability of eliminating that left turn egress onto Barton Road with the condition of approval that is being 5 proposed. He is confident that if a problem does emerge it will be discovered quickly and dealt with appropriately. Chairman Wilson stated that he is assuming that the proposed raised median will be going in down near the Freeway all the way up Barton Road. He-noticed that the plans only have a very short raised median proposed at the current time. He questioned if they are looking at putting in an additional median going down Barton Road if it is known how all of that functions when the additional median is put in. Building & Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that for right now the idea is to just construct a median from Barton Road to the most westerly driveway of the proposed project. From there on down to Canal, he believes that the City will have to hold the necessary public hearings to do that because there will be a lot of concern with businesses being able to get in and out of their driveways. From Canal Street all the way down to Vivienda will be another landscaped median and then there will be a break at the Miguel's driveway which will be signalized at that point. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter stated that in January we will be going to the City Council to amend the traffic mitigation fee ordinance to include funding for a raised median on Barton Road. Staff is doing the long term planning to the extent that we have developed a funding stream toward that project. That is not an obligation or a commitment to construct in a particular time frame it's just creating the ability for the City to generate revenue to build the median. Commissioner McNaboe stated that in the area of traffic and safety, she questioned how safety is going to be addressed with the drive-up window and its location in the parking lot between Fresh &Easy and Walgreens. Building & Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that he has seen this exact design in other cities and it is working. He feels that there really isn't going to be an issue with traffic. Commissioner Comstock indicated that he will hold his comments until after we have some discussion with the applicant. Chairman Wilson opened the Public Hearing for discussion Dave Leonard David Leonard Associates Stated that he has been working with staff for the majority of this year and is proud of what they were able to accomplish to this point. He introduced their team: Dr. Ha, owner of the project, Laura Ortiz, Evergreen Development, Tara Compagne, Evergreen Development, Manager for the Walgreens store, Katy Rhelms Evergreen Development, Manager for the Fresh & Easy store, Brian Collins, Civil Engineer, Tim Maloney, Landscape Architect and Gil Morton?, Leasing Agent. 'There have been a lot of people involved bringing all the pieces together and it's a - confederacy of different corporate entities that are coming together trying to merge their various goals and objectives into something that is cohesive to this plan. He stated that it is rather 6 obligatory to thank the staff for their efforts in these cases, however, they really do appreciate the guidance and collaboration of the staff that Grand Terrace has provided them in problem solving throughout this process. He gave a brief power point presentation of the project. Slide 1: gave an overall view of the project area. Slide 2: indicated that there is a fair degree of demolition occurring at the site. Slide 3: shows the current parcel configuration including nine parcels and virtually seven are occupied each with a building. Slide 4: shows the proposed parcel map with four parcels. Each building would have a parcel with fewer buildings and integrated more-as a center than what currently exists. Slide 5: shows the site plan, which is pedestrian friendly. Slide 6. . shows the square footage numbers of the site that was presented by staff in their presentation earlier. Slide 7. shows the preliminary grading plan. Slide 8: shows the stockpile plan which shows the routes that the trucks have to follow. They can not go through the residential area. There are a number of provisions to control erosion and to make sure that the soil is contained safely on the site. Slide 9: shows the utility plan. He reassured the Commission that all of the utilities along Barton Road will be relocated. Slide 10: shows the parking plan. 182 spaces are required. The Barton Road Plan does allow incentives for land assemblidge. Their plan has a reduction of 15%. Slide 11: shows the landscape plan. This gives the Commission an idea of the coverages that are at the site. Slide 12: shows the plant legend. The reason for this is to bring attention to the types of - plants that are being proposed. Slide 13: indicates the landscape summary. Slide 14. shows the elevations of the Walgreens building. Slide 15: shows more elevations of the Walgreens building. Slide 16. shows the floor plan of the Walgreens building. 7 - 1 Slide 17. shows the elevations of the Fresh and Easy building. Slide 18: shows more elevations of the Fresh and Easy building. Slide 19: shows the floor plan of the Fresh and Easy building. Slide 26. shows the restaurant building. He indicated that Dr. Ha has been working very diligently to get a restaurant user into the building. They had hoped that they might have somebody signed up to be able to present to the Commission, however, they have not been able to find that restaurant that is ready to commit to this site. There may be up to four food court type uses for this project. Slide 21: Mr. Leonard indicated they would like to discuss some minor modification to the set back. Under the AP Zone, staff has indicated that there is a 15 foot set-back required in this location. They have designed this with.a 12.5 foot set-back. There is a 6 foot screen wall and a variation in the elevation where it is rising as it goes north. If they move the buildings down, they will be encroaching into the food court or the other option would be to decrease the area of the restaurant. They would like the consideration of the Commission to allow a 12.5 foot set- back as opposed to the 15 feet. Slide 22: Mr. Leonard indicated that the existing Starbucks will look very different under the proposed plan. The idea is to enhance the pedestrian and dining experience in this area. Slide 23: He further stated that they would like to address the metal roof issue. They believe that there is a difference between corregated and standing seam metal. It is more aesthetically appealing and 25% solar reflectivity so there is some green aspects to it. It is 24 gauge steel. Slide 24. indicates that there have been several studies done on this project. Mr. Leonard,concluded his presentation and stated that he would be available to answer any questions that the Commission may have and appreciates the Commission's consideration of this project. Chairman Wilson opened discussion to the Commission. Commissioner Comstock stated that he likes the project; however, there are some things within the project that are difficult to overcome. He referred to the parking and the lot divisions on the site plan. He referred to the current parcel that has Starbucks on it. He stated that there are 25 parking spaces plus one handicap. The new division of that parcel cuts down the parking to 15 spaces plus one handicap. He stated that 25 spaces for that building is not enough now. He stated that the face of the entrance of the Walgreens is upon Barton Road and is assuming that is because of the pedestrian access that they are trying to do based on the Barton Road Specific Plan. The configuration of the parking on the Walgreens lot has 37 parking places plus 4 handicap; however, 2/3 of that parking is not in front of the Walgreens it is in front of the Fresh 8 & Easy building, which is where half of the parking that was at that Starbucks building has been moved to. He feels that there is a major issue of parking between Walgreens and Starbucks. Mr. Leonard responded that there is a condition for CCR's and reciprocal parking. There are no parking spaces that are designated for one use versus another, other than the handicap parking. Parking is far more numerous for the Starbucks under this condition than under the present condition because this opens up a broader parking field for accessibility at grade to the Starbucks center. One point that was mentioned that they may need to deal with is parking for employees, which would be the most outer areas to open up the spaces for the customers. The other aspect is the drive-way that is being shifted west allowing more parking spaces for Starbucks than currently. Opening up 40 spaces would be convenient to the Starbucks building but could also be used by Walgreens customers. They would expect that the Fresh & Easy store is going to be using the parking spaces towards the north end of the property. Chairman Wilson requested that he speak on the activity that happens between Fresh & Easy and Walgreens. He has some experience in relation with commercial strip malls and feels that it is a little deceptive in relation to how much parking is required for the particular type of service that is involved. While our Codes are fairly specific on an overall requirement, they don't always address what a Fresh & Easy is about business-wise and how long people stay in a parking spot and it's the same thing with Walgreens. From what he has been able to see with Walgreens there is a lot of quick in and out so the parking characteristics are different. He requested that they address the issue of cart corrals. He sees that they are out there taking up a couple of parking spaces. He questioned if there was any discussion with staff as to whether or not they are worth sacrificing the spaces for. Mr. Leonard responded that the functionality of the Walgreens and Fresh & Easy is that Walgreens is obviously a drug store and it does have a degree of quick in and quick out customers. Fresh & Easy is a market. People are going to go in there and discover things because there is a constant turnover of items and types of items. It is very similar to Trader Joe's. People are going to stay in the store longer. He indicated that they had a lot of discussion regarding the cart corrals. It was their preference originally to put them into the islands, however, they needed landscaping in the islands so that is why they ended up where they did. Fresh and Easy also desired to keep the carts fairly close and convenient to the consumer. Commissioner Comstock stated that he feels that the parking issue has not been solved. In looking at the entrance to the Fresh & Easy store, the main and only entrance, is directly in front of a large section of parking that he is assuming that people from Walgreens and Starbucks will also be using. Knowing human nature, people like to park as close to the establishment that they are patronizing. He feels that most people would not park a great distance from the location that they are going. He feels that they can make the parking a little more user friendly by increasing the number of spaces. Commissioner Comstock asked if there could be a way to shift the entrance to the Walgreens next to the entrance of the Fresh & Easy, which would open up more of a flow and ability for people to parka He also wanted to bring up the issue on the backside of Walgreens where the ingress and egress is on Barton Road. He expressed his concern regarding the blind corner where the window is for the pick-up. He believes that there is going to be a lot more traffic than they are anticipating. He stated that these are the main issues that he has with 9 the project. He doesn't have any problems with the roofing materials or the setback issues. He likes the plan and the design and appreciates the re-facing of the Starbucks building. He stated that the developer has gone to great lengths for this project and he likes.it, however, the parking and the flow of traffic are his major concerns. Mr. Leonard responded that Commissioner Comstock has raised some interesting points and obviously there are some thoughts with the parking and building arrangement. He stated that there would be two problems created if they shift the entry to the Walgreens to the top, one is they are compressing the entries of both stores to the same location with everyone then wanting to park in the same place and there is a competition for those spaces. The second issue is then what do they do with what is facing the street. The objectives that was relayed to them on the Barton Road Specific Plan is face the building to street and not to face the back of the building to the street. The other point that he would like to make is that Fresh & Easy and Walgreens have far less parking demands than restaurants, that is why the restaurants are located in a very different and isolated area and not bunched up with the other buildings so that there would be a parking field to accommodate those uses for the turnover that occurs during the course of the evening as people are dining. Laura Ortiz Evergreen Development Company 2390 E Camelback Road Phoenix,AZ Ms. Ortiz discussed the existing parking versus the new parking layout. They believe that Walgreens and Fresh & Easy are great co-tenants and have actually followed each other into multiple centers throughout the State. She stated that the shopping experience with a Fresh & Easy is different than shopping at a supermarket. The time spent at a Fresh & Easy is significantly shorter than a traditional supermarket. The average stay is 20 minutes. They believe that Walgreens and Fresh & Easy are national and international retailers and they understand their business very well and they would not want to move forward with a plan that did not provide adequate parking for their customers. They have satisfied themselves with the amount of parking for their customers and that it is sufficient based on the frequency and the timing of the use and the cross parking that will be provided. Ms. Ortiz stated that there is the stipulation for the cross access easement and believes that what they could do in there is address some employee parking spaces in a location that isn't going to compete. She feels that moving the entrances really concentrates the concern even further for parking. She indicated that the site plan went through many iterations, pushed and pulled in multiple directions by the Code, by the Specific Plan, and by staff direction. The access at the current proposed location, they believe, is a better situation than it is right now. They believe that they are providing a project that will serve the community and will share from the cross access and cross parking. Commissioner Comstock suggested that the developers go down and sit at Starbuck for four hours on a busy day and they will see what he is talking about. Chairman Wilson stated that he had a list to go over. He referred to the setback variance, he feels that the necessity for the setback variance not being supported. He is curious about the 10 proposed one-foot retaining wall. He questioned if there was a way to underpin the foundation of the restaurant building so that they don't have to put up a one-foot retaining wall and change the configuration of the area. Mr. Leonard responded that he asked the same question of their civil engineer. In designing the pad site, it didn't quite meet grade when it was originally laid out. This was before it was understood that there was going to be a wall all the way along the northern boundary. Now that there is a wall, as he understands it, that can be incorporated into the wall itself and not be a separate structure. Chairman Wilson stated that on the north edge of the Fresh &Easy there is a retaining wall in a 3 I/2 foot space. He is not 100% sure that it has been discussed with staff as an architectural feature but his experience dictates that it could also be an underpin wall or better used perhaps as much as four feet added to the overall parking space area and maybe that might help the circumstance especially with the flow through and it doesn't hurt to have a little wider area. Mr. Leonard stated that he would have to defer that question to Mr. Collins on why it was designed that way. Brian Collins Collins Engineering 3741 Versat Drive Riverside Stated that the wall has been designed as a separate stand alone retaining wall rather than incorporate it into the footing of the building based on costs. If they had to go with a six foot deep stem wall then the cost of the building would be much higher. Chairman Wilson stated that he was just trying to consider the space since he is getting the feeling that parking is a very important item. Chair Wilson asked how many days it will take to stock pile all of the dirt that they need or how many cubic yards were needed. Mr.Leonard responded that they need 4,000 cubic yards. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields stated that the City of Riverside has to dig to put in a pipe line on Grand Terrace Road, and that is going to be over time. Chairman Wilson stated that he,is concerned with having a busy intersection and the amount of time that it is.going to take to get this dirt stocked piled on the site. If necessary they can put it in the conditions but he encouraged staff to coordinate so that it is done in one time frame. Mr. Leonard stated that the movement would be during off-peak hours. Chairman Wilson stated that he.is thinking about overall safety, especially at that intersection. It is the main thouroghfare of the City. Chair Wilson stated he is of the opinion that they are going to have to add 24 inch box trees at the discretion of the Community Development Director. 11 Mr. Leonard questioned which trees Chairman Wilson was referring to. Chairman Wilson responded that he is referring to the ones that are within the parking area. He stated that he is curious about the power poles along Barton Road. He indicated that he sees some relocation happening. It's been his experience that utilities are place underground when there is substantial development in an area. He stated that it would seem-to him to be a better application to have the power poles underground. Mr. Leonard responded that it was his understanding that the power company wanted to keep those as overhead lines. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields stated that across the street they moved the power pole, however, they kept the lines overhead. Chairman Wilson asked about the voltage of the lines. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that he is unsure of the voltage. Chairman Wilson stated that as a condition he would like to include if"it is feasible that the power lines be placed underground. If the power company can't do that or won't do that then the condition is moot. He stated that he doesn't see a detail on the site plan or anywhere else stating the size of the parking spaces, assuming that they are all standard size. He indicated that it is not unusual to allow up to 25% of the spaces for compact spaces. He knows that we do not have that in our code but has seen it implemented in the City of Los Angeles, County of Orange and all other large jurisdictions in Southern California. If we were to examine that it might help the parking count come back up to the standard specification. He would be in support of some compact spaces where appropriate. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter stated that his experience with the compact parking stalls is that there are several jurisdictions that do have provisions in their code for compact mix of up to 25%. The City of Irvine abandoned that provision of their code in the late 1980's because what they found was there was general utilization of all spaces whether they were compact or otherwise. There are jurisdictions that continue to retain that provision but he feels generally there is a certain degree of dissatisfaction with mandating compact parking stalls because of poor utilization. Chairman Wilson stated that he doesn't necessarily feel that we need to change our code but in this instance it could be appropriate to locate some compact spaces. He will suggest this as a remedy on the parking count to get them closer to the standard. He will trust staff to implement that with the applicant. He questioned what the typical space size is. Senior Planner Molina responded that it is 9 feet by 19 feet. She stated that at times they are designed with a two foot overhang into a landscaping area. 12 Chairman Wilson indicated that there is parallel parking along Britton Way. He didn't see a call out on what the remaining width is after the parking. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that it is 29 feet. Mr.Leonard responded that the parallel spaces are 8 feet by 24 feet. Chairman Wilson questioned what the clear width is for fire access on Britton Way. Unidentified Person responded 24 feet. Chairman Wilson confirmed that there is a minimum of 24 feet through Britton Way without parking. He would be in support of the metal roof. He would like staff to pass this color board up to the public so that they have an opportunity to circulate this so that they have an idea of what they are talking about. Senior Planner Molina asked if it would be an appropriate time to convey Commissioner Phelps comments. Chairman Wilson responded in the affirmative. Senior Planner Molina stated that she nand Director Powers met with Commissioner Phelps this - afternoon and he expressed concern with respect to the following: - The architecture of the buildings - he felt that they were designed to all look separate. They don't have enough common features. - Strong concern with the _extensive use of the olive green color on the Fresh & Easy building and not used on all of the other buildings. Mr. Leonard stated that it is their opinion that the buildings are extremely similar and very unified throughout the project. Chairman Wilson questioned if on the existing retail if there is a color version of the change in the elevation. Mr.Leonard stated that there are variations in the color. Senior Planner Molina continued that Commissioner Phelps' concerns: - That the sound wall at the Fresh & Easy loading is not high enough to attenuate sound, based on his experience with delivery vehicles. He suggested a height of 6 to 8 feet. - Expressed a desire to incorporate some of the energy efficiency components that Fresh & Easy uses into the Walgreens project. - Expressed concern with a long term viability of the Fresh and Easy Market. He indicated that he heard that there may have been a statement made that if they don't see return on investments within a certain number of years then they would close their stores. 13 She stated that of all of Commissioner Phelps' concerns the biggest ones were the architecture and the sound wall. Mr. Leonard responded that in reference to the sound wall, an acoustical study was done for this and the recommendation of the height was made by an acoustical engineer. Also, they wanted to point out that the ramp is descending. He referred the question regarding the viability of the Fresh &Easy store to the developer. Lara Ortiz Evergreen Development Company Stated that Walgreens promotes recycling and tries to stay green. There were many reports that have been out there and a lot of speculation regarding Fresh & Easy. Fresh & Easy continues to build stores and plan to in the future. They are fully committed to making this work and they continue to see their stores being successful. Chairman Wilson asked where their nearest distribution center is. Lara Ortiz responded that it is in Riverside, and Chairman Wilson stated that it is a huge distribution center. Lara Ortiz stated that it serves southern California and the Arizona stores. They are working on opening a sizable distribution center in Northern California. Chairman Wilson stated that it would seem to him that they have a fairly aggressive business plan and they have already supported it by creating distributorships that feed these markets. Mr. Leonard stated that in Condition #19 in attachment 4 the last sentence calls for potted plants at the entrances and seating areas of all buildings. Fresh & Easy at the request of staff, designed a planter along the frontage of their building which was in lieu of potted plants. They would like the condition to read one way or the other. Chairman Wilson questioned how staff wanted to address this condition. Community and Economic Development Director Powers responded that staff would concur with Fresh & Easy. She stated that with regard to the green initiative, which is becoming popular in the region, she wanted to pass on an additional comment from Commissioner Phelps was to ask Walgreens consider some of the sky light improvements that Fresh & Easy has included. Mr. Leonard responded that the stores are designed completely different. The Fresh &Easy has an open floor plan and open ceiling plan where they use the sky lights because they have an open ceiling. Walgreens,-as with every other Walgreens in the Country has a drop down ceiling and does not accommodate sky lights in that same fashion. 14 Commissioner Comstock asked if Commissioner Addington had any written comments. Chairman Wilson stated that he.had no written comments from Commissioner Addington, and at this time he will open discussion up to the public. William Kaminsky 11818 Burns Avenue Grand Terrace Stated that this morning he had the opportunity to take a look at the grading plan with Senior Planner Molina. He feels that there are some problems with it. He feels that the biggest problem is that they are taking advantage of the City of Grand Terrace Barton Road Specific Plan. The majority of the frontage of the parcel that is being discussed lies within Mt. Vernon Avenue. It does not lie within Barton Road. There was an opportunity to purchase more property to the north of this site should we also include that as being a part of the Barton Road Plan. He would think that all of the rules would essentially stop where Britton Way is at that pertain to the Barton Road parking spaces. You can take a look at Britton Road 15 times and the only way that he can figure out how to get into those spaces on the south side of the road is to come in from the west off of the property. He questioned if that has been addressed. What has been addressed already is the situation of the delivery hours. He lives in the area and visits the stores in town and stated that even with an ordinance you have to have police enforcement. He expressed concern that delivery people use the front doors instead, they will park on the side of Fresh & Easy and block the road, creating a safety hazard. He feels that they should come in off of Britton Way. Figuratively, he stated, there is really only one entrance and that is off of Britton Way. If you look at the west boundary of Walgreens, because of the compactors you are forced to drive away from the building. If you turn into the driveway headed north you will be aimed at the headlights of the person that is coming south smack on. He expressed his concerns with the drive-thru at the Walgreens and the safety hazards that he feels exist. He expressed his concerns with the grading plan and feels that the elevations on the Fresh and Easy are lying to them. He has expressed his concerns about having the water line under the curb and gutter. He feels that the whole plan needs more work. And the question, does the Barton Road Specific Plan apply to endless property to the north or does it apply only to the frontage along the road, needs to be answered. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded mainly to the grading plan. This whole process of the Planning Commission is to look at the concept and as it is mentioned on the grading plan, this is a preliminary grading plan. The fact that there might be a water line under the curb and gutter that is part of the Building and Safety and the Engineering Team that will go through the plans with a fine toothed comb with Mr. Collins and will figure out these little problems that Mr. Kaminsky has noticed. At this point in time, this is a preliminary plan. Chairman Wilson questioned if the water improvements are going to be public. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded in the affirmative. 15 Chairman Wilson stated that if they are going to be public then they will be subject to the requirements of the public jurisdiction. Commissioner Comstock stated that as he looked at the parallel parking spaces on the south side of Britton Way, the only thing that he could figure out is that they are intending for people to pull into the restaurant parking lot and make the loop and come around and face the correct direction. Mr. Leonard stated that Commissioner Comstock read it right. He stated that regarding the applicability of the entire site and the Barton Road Specific Plan, there were extensive, diligent efforts made by the applicant and City Staff trying to include a parcel to the north into this project. Dr. Ha also pursued diligently for the parcel to the west of the project. Those efforts were made and the proposed project includes those parcels that he was able to acquire, therefore we are dealing with the design issues that we have. There was an effort made to try and unify everything. He stated that there will be parking lot lighting and wall lighting on the buildings throughout the center. Condition #18 deals with a photometric plan that deals with illumination. This will be dealt with at the staff level to make sure that the project is adequately lit. The walls are not shown on the elevations because they wanted the Commission to be able to see the elevations. The walls are depicted on the grading plans and on the site plans, they are not trying to hide anything, they are trying to show things. They believe that they have depicted all of the walls that are featured within the project in profile or plan view on the various other plans. There was a change on the plans on the design on Britton Way.to reduce the parking directly onto it. There is a section for Britton Way that appears on the parcel map that refers to a previous design. That design will be reflected on the improvement plans.for the project as the site plans currently shows it. Chairman Wilson questioned what was the pleasure of the Commission. Commissioner McNaboe questioned what will be done with the walls that block the view of the buildings to make them pleasing to look at. Mr. Leonard responded that they wilt be either a decorative split face, slump stone, or some type of finish will be put on them. They have submitted a wall plan to staff for review. Chairman Wilson confirmed that staff will have authority to the aesthetics of the walls. Jeffrey McConnell Walnut Avenue Grand Terrace Thanked staff for bringing Fresh & Easy to Grand Terrace, there are a lot of people who like these types of stores. He is glad that all of these stores are coming, however, he feels that there are going to be several problems that we are going to have. He also frequents this area a lot. He stated that the site plans do not show the other perimeter properties. All great leaders look into the future, this is going to be a problem if we do not look into the future. The property to the west will one day be developed as well as the other property that the owners did not want to sell. 16 He stated that he was on the ad-hoc committee for the traffic project prioritization and it was unanimous that one median be done along Barton Road, however, with the development and the population density increasing, especially on this busy corner, he can see that it will be a problem if there isn't a median in that area. He questioned how big the median is.going to be. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields responded that the median will be 12 feet wide. Jeffrey McConnell feels that a 12 foot median will be a problem. The median will stop all those people that frequent the Starbucks building and all of the proposed buildings. That median should be as narrow as possible to be able to make the left hand turn lane as long as possible to eliminate back-up. He questioned if there is a left hand turn lane on Barton Road. He referred to the site plan, as Mr. Comstock indicated, the current parking is insane. Chairman Wilson, made the comment that he counts 19 existing spaces which is a lot different configuration in relation to what the parking will ultimately be. Jeffrey McConnell stated that his opinion is that the spaces along this area will be sufficient, for sanity purposes, for the Starbucks building which will leave nothing for Walgreens. He feels that if the site plan gets out to the general public before this goes to the City Council there is going to be a lot of people here complaining. His idea is to have the entrance facing the parking. He questioned if there is a LEEDS rating. He confirmed the haul route for the dirt. He stated that the Mexican Palms do not create any shade they just create falling frawns during the windy season. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter stated. that the ultimate design of the median has not been determined. There are physical constraints that need to be dealt with obviously in terms of providing access. The length of storage requirements for the east bound left turn on Barton Road has not been quantified it's information that when it is appropriate to design the median the storage requirements will be done at the time. Staff is confident that either .by means of providing adequate storage in the left turn or by modification of the signal timing that we can get this intersection operating at the City standard level of service. That threshold has been met as part of the traffic impact study. Operationally they are confident that the intersection will work. Fine tune details have not been completely resolved. Chairman Wilson clarified that in accordance with the traffic circulation and the frontage that is available on the property the improvement plan will be designed to accommodate the best traffic flow that can be done for this circumstance and the ultimate condition on Barton Road won't be addressed because this project is not responsible for that. Just because a project or an improvement is set in concrete doesn't mean that it is not able to be changed when larger perspectives are a consideration. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter stated that the applicant is not conditioned or required to deal with ultimate conditions that is the City's responsibility. When the time comes to design the median we will be looking at not only the impacts of this project but the ultimate storage requirements for this intersection. He stated that they are confident, based on the evaluation 17 - provided by the consultant and our own evaluation that this intersection will meet City standards both at the time when this project opens-and the long term future as well. Commissioner Comstock he stated that he recalls reading three or so years ago as he read through the General Plan at that time and there was a stipulation for projects that impact traffic and the larger the impact of traffic the more responsibility the developer has to mitigate the traffic issues. He is wondering if a traffic count has been done for this plan. He is interested if there is a figure on how many trips they.are looking at per hour or day through this project. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter responded that it is addressed in the staff report. The traffic study looked at the amount of traffic that can be generated by this project, compared to the amount of traffic that would be generated by the existing development if it is fully occupied, the additional traffic that would be generated by the project on a daily basis is something around 1,076 trips. AM peak hour is 73 and the PM peak hour is 108. This project alone in looking at comparison to the occupancy of the development that is currently on site is generating about 100 trips in the am peak hour over what we currently see. Chairman Wilson confirmed that the trip count and circulation was a consideration pertaining to this particular project and the way these improvements are designed and the recommendations were made. Commissioner Comstock indicated that knowing what is going on over in Highgrove with 2600 - homes going in and the traffic increase with the high school, as far and parking and traffic flow coming through this project. He questioned where those 2800 kids are going to go when they have their break or when they get out of class, he would venture to guess that 25% of them are going to find their way to Starbucks and we want to capture that tax revenue and we want a place for them to park and ease for them to get in and out of the establishment. 'He also believes that many of those students will be patronizing the Fresh and Easy. He is looking at this and wondering if we are not doing a disservice to cut our parking requirements short on this project. It seems like we are trying to do too much for the size of the parcel. With the increase of homes and the high school he is seeing a potential problem. Sylvia Robles 23000 Block Orangewood Court Grand Terrace Stated that her expertise is not planning her expertise is public finance. She indicated that she was involved in an accident on Britton Way when someone was using it as a short cut to work. Looking at this plan she would be thrilled as a resident to have these shopping opportunities here in town. She feels that they are trying to do too much with the site plan. The circulation that the City has as a framework is not good. Things are not going to get better. She feels that Commissioner Comstock has brought up some excellent concerns. She feels that it is confusing to see demolition going on and dirt being brought it and stockpiled for something that hasn't been approved yet. She doesn't know what type of incentives, if any economic incentives given from the City, but given the economic situation cities in competing for sales tax revenues have ended up with a lot of empty stores and in this economic crisis there has been an excess of 18 building retail and she feels that this is where the City Council needs to get involved. She feels that they are trying to do too much with the land that is available. Charles Hornsby 22656 Brentwood Street Grand Terrace Questioned if the Planning Commission and City Council has discussed whether the town can support Walgreens and CVS in this economic climate, stating that even when times are good can two stores thrive. Mr. Comstock seems to be the only one that is strong on the parking. The temptation always seems to be to undercut on the parking. He goes to that section of town a lot. It bothers him that the standard is 181, someone went to a lot of work and trouble to come up with the-specification that this site needs 181 spots. The intelligent thing to do would be to make sure from the very beginning that you know you are going to have enough parking. Mr. Comstock makes a good point, as well as others, that it is a lot to put on this land. He noticed early in the presentation regarding the setback. The presenter said that they were requesting a minor modification that had to do with the setback. He wanted to go from 15 to 12.5 feet. He feels that it is not minor. He feels that it is huge. It just goes to show that everything is so crowded. Jeffrey McConnell Walnut Avenue Grand Terrace Stated that he forgot to mention that the office professional zoned area where the restaurants are going to go, can it be kept flexible so that it can have an overlay in case they move out of the restaurants so something else can come in, possibly commercial as well as office professional. He stated that when the new Stater Bros is built they will have a full pharmacy inside so there will be three pharmacies in town. Chairman Wilson closed the public hearing and returned discussion to the Commission. Commissioner Comstock stated that he doesn't want the applicants to feel like they are being hammered. He likes the project and the stores, and they like what they are-trying to do, he is not against it. He just feels that there are some issues that need to be looked at for the community's sake, at least from his perspective that.on a long term basis will lower the quality of traffic and the ease with which the people are able to get in and out and through the community. He supports the projects and is willing to compromise on some things but there are some things that he can't compromise on. Commissioner McNaboe stated that she likes the overall concept of this project. She doesn't have an issue with the roof. As far as the Barton Road Specific Plan, it does call out corrugated metal; it doesn't say.no metal roofs. She feels that this is an atheistically pleasing roof and since it is not a major portion, she feels that it will be a nice feature. She doesn't know that we are in a position to call out what businesses can come into our City as far as' competition with other businesses that are already here, she doesn't feel that this is our place. She doesn't feel that a 19 business would consider coming to a town if they didn't think that there was a climate in which they could survive. She doesn't feel that this.is an issue they can address in this forum. She stated that she is concerned about the parking. She understands if someone is going to multiple locations it changes the ratio of parking that you need. You don't need the parking that you would need for each individual building or business alone. She is unsure how to address the concern to make sure that there is adequate parking. She doesn't particularly like to frequent businesses that do not have enough parking, again she would imagine that those businesses going in would have a vested interest in making sure that they are not under-parked. Chair Wilson stated that at this time the Commission has the election of a couple of different options. They can either outright deny the project or they can outright approve it. The project item can be continued and he would mention because of the outstanding issues that have been expressed by the Commissioners in relation to the parking issue, that continuance might be an option in order to be able to rework the parking situation to recoup additional spaces if that is possible. He would like staff s input in relation to that particular line item so that we are fully equipped to be able to make a motion. Community and Economic Development Director Powers requested that the applicant respond to the parking question. Mr. Leonard would like to bring a couple of items to the attention of the Commission. The parking standards are based on square footages that are established for each use within the project as a stand-alone use, Commissioner McNaboe correctly stated that. It does not perceive or pre-assume that there are going to be centers where there is interaction. That is the premise in which this project was designed. It may not be the best in terms of the closeness of the spaces into the entries but they believe that there is enough parking to meet the demands for the center. With that said, they realize that the Commission is struggling to come up with other scenarios to enhance the parking. One was put on the table earlier that he feels has some merit, which is the consideration to have compact spaces with areas designated for employee use. He feels that this is an option that is worthy of taking a look at to enhance some of the parking count within the center. Chair Wilson stated that it would seem to him that in this kind of a development, even though there isn't quite the same type of flexibility that there is in a full scale strip mall or a large mall type of environment or professional building, the parking requirements are highly dependent on what the use is and we have already established two major uses within the area but what is still up for grabs is the restaurant that obviously can't be what that use is without some consideration on how that is going to fit into the parking hue. With that in mind he questioned if staff could see a possibility that they could control the parking situation to standard implementation of the Barton Road Specific Plan and/or areas that are outside of the Specific Plan that are subject to standard code options by specifying what use would have to be implemented within the restaurant space. If there isn't sufficient parking remaining to cover 'a code condition or implement the Barton Road Specific Plan that those spaces would not be able to be occupied. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields questioned if they could look at a possible shared parking survey analysis that would look at compact spaces. 20 Senior Planner Molina indicated that she wanted to clarify a couple.of things regarding the parking. The way that the development code reads for parking is tiered. If you have a stand- alone 10,000 square foot retail/commercial center, it is 1 space for every 200 square feet of square footage. When you hit a 35,000 square foot threshold the parking demand goes to 1 for every 225 square feet of square footage so it's given a little bit of relaxation. 75,000 or greater it is 1 space for every 250 square feet of square footage. When there is more square footage there is a little bit of parking reduction. This particular center already considers that it is over 35,000 square feet so the parking demand is a little less for what would be considered for a stand- alone commercial center. There is a reciprocal parking and access agreement so there is a concept of shared parking. There was a comment that the Barton Road Specific Plan-standards were being put into the administrative professional zone and that is not correct. That particular parcel stands . alone, meets all of the AP zoned requirements. Right now the way that it is, it is over parked for a restaurant,just if you consider that parcel, however, it is lending some of those excess parking spaces to the entire center so there is already a shared parking concept and she is not sure that if a survey could be done that would indicate anything different than they are proposing. Chairman Wilson questioned that in relation to the restaurant, are we using the high side or are we using the low side. Senior Planner Molina responded that they are using 1 for every 225 gross square feet, which would be considered the medium. Chairman Wilson stated to explain it to the public, each one of the spaces has a concentration point on parking requirements. Based on whether it is a store or an office building, there is a threshold that you would have to get to maintain that use. Often times in strip malls those uses will bounce around and when they do that there is a serious consideration on whether you can allow that use within your building because you may not have sufficient parking to be able to accommodate that use. Sometimes in large jurisdictions, they will allow a canvassing of the parking and on 4 hour time frames you will see an ariel view taken of a parking condition to determine how the parking is really utilized and if necessary over an extended period of time to see if it's realistic to say that you have to apply that standard parking situation to all of the uses the same way. He feels that in this case, because there are some varied uses, that might be applicable and he welcomes the applicant to address this issue. Tim Maloney 4649 Brockton Avenue Riverside Indicated that he is the landscape architect, however, he is also a Planning Commissioner and they deal with this on a regular basis. He is a landscape architect he works on mix use projects all over the State. There have been a lot of good comments this evening. This is a mix use type situation and people are not coming all at the same time and to the same place. We have to realize that we may not be able to park directly in front of Starbucks we may have to park 2 or 3 stalls over; however, it does work for the overall number of stalls. They tend not to peak out in 21 these situations. Starbucks has peak times, Walgreens has peek times and they don't always mix and match. In many situations like this they work. Chairman Wilson stated that the Commission has three options. Senior Planner Molina requested that before the motion is made there were a few conditions that were talked about potentially revising, eliminating or modifying and other landscaping conditions, and she would like a consensus from the Commission if possible on whether they should be modified or incorporated. She stated that the following are the conditions: Condition #19 of Attachment 4—This particular condition had to do with the planter and the potted plants issue. The applicant has requested with respect to Fresh and Easy that the Landscape Planter up front be eliminated in lieu of the potted plants. It is her recommendation that the last sentence be added to say, "The landscape planter in front of the Fresh and Easy Market may be deleted." She feels that this would address the applicant's concern. Commissioner Comstock indicated that he would be in agreement with that. Senior Planner Molina indicated that she wanted to get clarification on that. It was her understanding that it was the planter that the applicant was asking to have deleted and there was a question whether it was the pots or the planter. Chairman Wilson stated that it was his understanding that they were looking for an either or circumstance. They were looking for a planter or the pots not both for the Fresh and Easy only. Senior Planner Molina stated that they would revise that condition to allow the applicant to decide which they want to provide at the time the construction plans come forward. Chairman Wilson stated that it would be better to work with staff to determine the best aesthetic. Senior Planner Molina - Condition #25 — With respect to the setback. She didn't have a clear consensus on this. The other issue that comes up with that is that procedurally it wasn't included as part of the project description so they would either come back and include that as part of the project description or if it is an administrative type of review that we would handle administratively. They can look and see what the threshold is for set-back variances in the code. Chairman Wilson stated that it would be appropriate for staff to examine that and then if necessary it can be a separate action. 22 Senior Planner Molina Condition # 27 - wanted to confirm that there was a consensus that the metal roofing would be appropriate. Chairman Wilson responded that there was a consensus on his side. Commissioner Comstock concurred. Commissioner McNaboe concurred. Senior Planner Molina indicated that with the consensus of the Commissioners she would recommend deleting Condition#27. Condition#44—This goes back to the undergrounding of the Public Improvements along Barton Road. Staff would recommend that they would rewrite to read "All utilities shall be placed underground as determined by the Public Works Director and Utility Companies." Chair Wilson stated that he would like to differentiate between on-site and off-site. He feels that it is appropriately worded that all on-site utilities shall be placed underground as determined by the Public Works Director. All frontage utilities shall be placed underground if feasible in coordination with the serving utility. Senior Planner Molina stated that there was a recommendation that the size of the trees be increased to a minimum of a 24-inch box. She would like a consensus of the Commission on whether this condition should be changed. Chair Wilson responded yes on his side. Commissioner Comstock concurred. Commission McNaboe concurred. Senior Planner Molina stated that she believes that the request was for the parking lot trees. Chair Wilson responded that it should be a minimum of a 24 inch box throughout the site. Commissioner Comstock agreed. Commissioner McNaboe agreed. Chair Wilson questioned if the applicant had a problem with the size of the trees. Mr.Leonard responded in the negative. 23 Senior Planner Molina stated that Commissioner Phelps questioned increasing the height of the sound wall. Chair Wilson stated that he doesn't believe that Commissioner Phelps had the benefit of a site analysis. Had he had that it probably would have been sufficient information for him. Senior Planner Molina stated that those were the outstanding questions that staff had with respect to the Conditions of Approval. Based upon the action that the Commission takes, staff can incorporate these changes. MOTION PC-24-2008 Commissioner Comstock made a motion to continue this item to the next meeting to give the designer the opportunity to revisit the parking/traffic issues. Motion dies due to a lack of a second. MOTION PC-25-2008 Commissioner McNaboe made a motion to approve Conditional Use Permit 08-05, Tentative Parcel Map 08-02 (TPM No. 19131), Vacation of Right-of-Way, and Environmental 08-03; to redevelop a 3.6 acre site and develop a commercial project totaling approximately 41,000 square feet in commercial ("Barton Plaza") including the items that were discussed. Second by Chair.Wilson. 2-1-2-0 Motion carries with Commissioner Comstock Voting No and Commissioner Phelps and Vice-Chair Addington being . absent. • Information to Commissioners -None at this time • Information from Commissioners -None at this time CHAIR WILSON ADJOURNED THE SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 9:30 P.M. STATING THAT THE MEETING OF JANUARY 1, 2009 WAS CANCELLED AND THAT THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE HELD ON JANUARY 15,2009. Respectfully Submitted, Appr Joyce Powers, Doug Wilson, Chairman Community and Economic Planning Commission Development Director 24