Loading...
04/06/2006 Community and Economic Development Department CALIFORNIA GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING April 6,2006 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on April 6, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.. by Chairperson Doug Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairperson Matthew Addington,Vice Chairperson Tom Comstock, Commissioner Robert Bidney, Commissioner Darcy McNaboe, Commissioner Gary Koontz, Community Development Director John Lampe, Associate Planner Rose Smith, Planning Secretary l 7:00 P.M. CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Bidney • Roll Call PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None Chair Wilson: Chair Wilson introduced the project. ITEM: 1. SA-06-02 and The project will consist of the construction of a two-story commercial/industrial V-06-01/E-06-02 building containing offices, warehousing and wholesale activities. The building will contain approximately 26,390 square feet of floor area with a maximum height of about 34 feet. Other areas of the property will be developed for employee and customer parking, truck loading and unloading areas, and landscaping. The Site and Architectural Review (SA-06-02) has been filed for the design and layout of the project, and the Variance (V-06- 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace,balifornia 92313-5295 • 909/ 824-6621 01) has been filed to modify the height limit in"Planning Area No. 1" of the Outdoor Adventures Center Specific Plan. APPLICANT: Howard Parsell Company on behalf of Essco Wholesale Electric Company LOCATION: An approximately 2.4 acre parcel located on the southerly side of Commerce Way beginning about 240 feet westerly of Michigan Street. RECOMMENDATION:Open the public hearing, receive testimony, close the Public Hearing and approve SA-06-02, to construct a two-story commercial/industrial building; approve V-06-01, the variance to modify the height limit in Planning Area No. 1 of the Outdoor Adventures Center Specific Plan; and approve E-06-02. STAFF Associate Planner Lampe greeted the Commission and presented his staff report as follows: The subject site (project) is located on the southerly side of Commerce Way off of Michigan Street and the site consists of two parcels. It is about 2.4 acre in size and has a maximum northsouth dimension of 200 ft. and eastwest of 700 ft. It is an irregularly shaped parcel located on the southerly side of Commerce Way. The site is currently level, but it appears that it's been rough-graded on the easterly portion where it is about 3-4 ft. higher than the westerly portion of the site. Overall, the property does slope in a westerly direction towards the freeway. Surrounding areas are developed with commercial wholesale uses to the northwest. The wholesale hardware facility is located across Commerce way. The Superior Pool site at this location, right here, is the current Essco building and facilities located northwest of the subject site. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to approve the new location. Essco will be moving across the street with the new building facility as proposed tonight. Access to the site is provided by Commerce Way. The Department of Building and Safety/ Public Works is requesting an additional 4 ft. of widening along the frontage for the ultimate widening and improvement of Commerce Way. The subject site lies within Planning Area No. 1 of the Outdoor Adventures Center Specific Plan (the "OAC" as it's called). This is Planning Area No. 1, which does permit general retail and wholesale trade businesses such as proposed by the applicant tonight. The proposed use is consistent with Planning Area No. 1 as allowable use. Also, located in Planning Area No. 1 are the businesses just described together with the Cal State building to the immediate north of the subject site. This is a skating rink which has been there for a number of years. The properties to the east lie within the Barton Road Specific Plan, including a mobile home park to the east of the subject site. Properties farther south are developed for residential uses and are in the single-family R-1 zone. Also to the south is a small business park that is CM (commercial/manufacturing) in this location. Further south on Michigan St. are additional residential R-1 properties. Properties to the southwest of the site are also in the Outdoor Adventures Center. They are located in Planning Area No. 2 of the Outdoor Adventures Center, but are presently vacant. This is the site plan with a full-scale drawing, and it's up on the display board behind showing the proposed development consisting of the approximately 26,000 sq. ft. building in this location in the easterly portion of the site. The westerly portion of the site, which is about an acre in size 2 is devoted to the yard area for the transportation, delivery and storage needs of the facility. The front portion of the building has a 3,000 sq. ft. second floor. The main reason for the variance request tonight is to allow for that second-story, the front part of the building to be used for offices. The yard area shows four lock-loading docks on the westerly side of the building together with a fork-lift ramp in this location, south of the property line. Also shown are 15 parking spaces that will be used for employee parking in the southwest corner. In the extreme southwest tip will be a landscaped area that they'll also use for part of the water retention, and part of the overall scheme for drainage of the property. Additional parking for employees and customers will be provided at the easterly side of the property. There's a 30-space parking lot in this location, and additional 17 spaces on the north side of the property building next to Commerce Way. Vehicle access to the site will be provided by three driveways. This driveway is mainly for passenger cars and relatively small vehicles. Two large driveways farthest to the west and at 40- 50 ft. in width will be large enough to accommodate trucks that will be making deliveries as well as providing transport for materials that they are selling at their site. The yard area that is shown on the site plan will be enclosed by an 8 foot-high wall, which will be decorative in nature on Commerce Way as shown on the site plan. Each driveway location for the vehicles in the yard area will have a wrought iron decorative gate. The typical front elevation of that wall and gates were shown on Sheet A3 (the elevations). This is the floor plan of the building shown on Sheet Al in the packet that was given to the Commission, showing that there will be large warehousing area of over 20,000 sq. ft. On the first floor, there will be an additional 3,000 sq. ft. of office area, and this is the "will-call" area where customers and clients will be coming in to do their business in the facility. That "will- call" area will be about 2,000 sq. ft. in area. The westerly part of the building, as shown on the floor plan, is where the 4 loading docks will be, and way down at the southwest corner is the access for forklifts. All of the openings for the docs and forklifts have roll-up doors. The second floor plan mainly shows the first and second floor offices that are proposed for the use of the employees. On the first floor, there will be sales offices next to the "will-call" area. Clients or customers go in there to discuss and make their orders. There will be additional private offices and conference rooms, and other incidental rooms for the employees' lunch break and restrooms. The second floor will be similarly developed with private offices, file cabinet storage,restrooms, and conference rooms. Sheet A3 shows the elevations for the northwest and east elevations of the proposed concrete tilt- up building. However, they do have various architectural features reflecting the "OAC" theme; the craftsmen's detailing over the windows, and also over the north and east entrances. This will include the simulated wood trim around the windows and the simulated wood trim around the doorways. Additional architectural embellishments consist of the use of decorative reveals and recessed inlets in the northwest and east elevations to add architectural relief to the building. The recess inlet will also be used on the decorative fence along Commerce Way. Also, as seen on the north elevation, the proposed building will have a height of 34 ft. where there are two- stories seen on the north elevation. The remainder of the building, the south part, will have a height of 30 ft. where it does not have a second story. In Planning Area No. 1, the height limit is normally 25 ft. However, there is specific language in the "OAC" that says that in Planning Area No. 1, the Commission may modify this 25 ft. height, and up to 35 ft., by filing a variance. 3 The staff does believe that the irregular size and shape of the subject site would warrant the granting of a variance for the request of a two-story structure in order to allow for the same amount of floor area as more regularly shaped properties in the area. We have also been supplied, by the applicant, a preliminary landscaping plan showing a detailed plant palate, which includes trees, shrubs, and turf areas. Tree sizes, mainly 24" box size, will be substantial. The landscaping will be located mainly around the two parking areas to the east and north of the building. A substantial landscaping strip will run along the Commerce Way frontage and will add to the appearance of the property. Also, a large landscape area, as I pointed out earlier, is in the retention area that's at the western tip of the site. There is a detailed plant palate in the Outdoor Adventures Center Specific Plan. We have added a condition that the final landscaping plan, as reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director, will have to be in compliance with the landscaping plant palate of the Outdoor Adventures Center. We are, also, in receipt of a preliminary grading plan for this project, which shows that the site will drain along a swale. The grading plan will show that there's a swale that will allow for drainage running along the northerly part of the property flowing into the retention area at the westerly end of the site. The applicant is here tonight to answer any questions the Commission might have about compliance with the City's "NPDES"requirements. We, also, have a color and materials board that shows the, basically, earth-tone colors to be employed on this building. Again, this is in compliance with the design standards of the Outdoor Adventures Center, and I am sure,the Commission has noted that the applicant has gone through some extensive trouble preparing color versions of the landscaping plan and the proposed elevations of the building for their consideration. This project was evaluated in terms of the requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act. The staff concluded that the project does qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration in that the project will not have an adverse effect on the environment. Lastly,the staff is recommending this evening that the Planning Commission approve SA-06-02, Variance 06-01 and Environmental 06-02 based on findings and facts, and recommend that the Condition of Approvals as set out on Attachment 15 of the Staff Report as well as the Resolution of Approval. That does complete my presentation Mr. Chairman, and I would be glad to answer any questions you or the Commissioners may have at this time. Director Koontz: One quick note before we start with that part of it. Commissioner Addington asked me a question concerning the condition on the parcel merger under Condition 19 of the Resolution. Vice Chair Addington: Thank you. Chair Wilson: I would like to take a little bit of time. We did receive a late entry in relation to an item from Johnson & Sedlack. The Commission has not had an opportunity to review that. We will take that time right now, and then see if there are any comments. Let's take a few minutes. (Long Silence) 4 Chair Wilson: Commissioners, have we had sufficient time to digest it? Commissioner Addington: Thank you. Chair Wilson: To say that we note Mr. Johnson's objections, we will proceed based on the strength of staffs responses to Mr. Johnson's objections. Let's open up the time to discuss this matter with staff and receive any questions or comments the Commissioners may have in relation to the Staff Report. Commissioner Addington: I do have one question. Gary, thank you for answering my previous question on the lot merger. Looking at Planning Area No.1, one exhibit you provided for the "OAC", it shows landscaping down a median. Now, I realize this is only one part of the total "OAC", but at what phase of the "OAC" are we proposing to actually construct the median? Director Koontz: If you recall, during the public hearings we had on the "OAC", which were quite extensive, there was quite a discussion received from the existing property owners and businesses along this existing segment. They were very concerned about changing the street pattern. If you recall,there was quite a discussion that the median would actually start below the existing street where it ends because we're going to have an additional right-of-way out there. It is very difficult to provide a median within the existing right-of-way with existing curbs and gutters, existing buildings and all that, to really have the entire Commerce Way with a median. For the rest of it, it is going to be widening out as we go from the south. There's a commitment made, we can go back to the minutes,to all the existing businesses there that we weren't going to really destroy their access on to the properties. Commissioner Addington: So, south of where the road ends, it'll widen out into a divided road with a median. Director Koontz: Right. The section is going to transition from here going further south. Commissioner Addington: To what, 92, 94, 96? Director Koontz: I forgot the exact width, but it's got a landscaped parkway and median. Vice Chair Addington: Wider than 88 feet. Director Koontz: Yes. Chair Wilson: Any other questions or comments from the staff? Vice Chair Addington: Just one. Looking-at the green colors and looking at the exhibit with the brown colors, are one of these off? Director Koontz: Let's refer that to the applicant. Vice Chair Addington: Alright. Thank you. 5 Chair Wilson: I do have one question of staff. I know that our"OAC" requires an 8 ft. concrete wall with pilasters or whatever you call it, but I don't believe that I know what the treatment of the wall face will be, and I don't think I saw it here. Director Koontz: There was a section somewhere on the elevations that shows it is an 8 foot wall, it's concrete and it will have pilasters. So, to us, because this is a kind of a stand alone parcel, an 8 foot wall, it has pilasters, it's concrete, and it's capped, it coincides with the general direction of the Outdoor Adventures Center Specific Plan. Most of the conditions and requirements of the "OAC" are really focused on the major brand new development, big projects where we can standardize everything. Where as here, because you have stuff across the street, it's kind of a transitional area. We spoke with the applicant and the owner at length trying to blend in the "OAC" and the craftmen's theme and all of that as much as we could into a tilt-up concrete building, and they've been very, very cooperative. I think we've come a long way, and it kind of matches the "OAC"requirements. Chair Wilson: Is it a plastered wall? What is the finish on the face? Director Koontz: I believe it's concrete. You can have the... Chair Wilson: Just painted concrete. Director Koontz: Right. With landscaping in front, one of the big issues as someone has said, "we're worried about graffiti." So, I believe the applicant can expand on that, also. Chair Wilson: Any other questions from the staff? Chair Wilson invited the applicant to speak on behalf of his proposed project. Howard Parsell Howard Parsell Company 4854 Main St. Yorba Linda, CA On behalf of Essco Wholesale Electric Company My company will be engineering the project. We have read the staff report. Gary and John, we appreciate your input. We agree with the Condition of Approval. It will be a very nice project for Essco. To answer your question, the wall will be totally concrete and painted. There is a great graffiti paint out there, and we might try that. It makes the cleanup easier. I think the best bet will be to grow vines. We do have a 10' landscape strip, and we'll have the opportunity to landscape pretty good; and the wall does have those medallions that will, hopefully, match the features of the building. There's some tie there. Regarding your concern about the color, lighting and so on, it's been so long since I did that board that I can't remember; but I think the rendering is probably not the colors. We're looking for a beige/brown and red/brown. Vice Chair Addington: O.k., and on the board it's green. Alright. Thank you. Howard Parsell: I'm sure we can make it work. We'll do our best. 6 Chair Wilson: What's the spacing on the vines that you are going to put in? Sure, you're right, the vines are going to be a solution on the wall. Howard Parsell: Yes, we haven't gotten fully into detail with the landscaping yet, but I'd recommend something very dense, something that will grow quick. Chair Wilson: Thank you. Any other questions? Vice Chair Addington: Just one. One of the questions that I typically ask is regarding the NPDES compliance. How do you -propose to comply with all of that? I know you have the one basin, but can you just give me a description of how you are going to comply with that with WQMP? Horward Parsell: Yes. We've got a substantial area set aside for infiltration into the bio basin, what we like to call a retention basin, which will handle first flush situations. We're fortunate enough to have a pretty good storm drainage right to the west with a San Bernardino County Flood Control storm drain, which we are assuming and hoping we can tie into so that one of their pipes that will be available to handle big flows, will take it directly to the storm drain after the filtration process. We will submit the WQMP and SWEPP as required. Vice Chair Addington: Thank you very much. Commissioner Bidney: I have a question in regard to hazardous waste containers. What kind of hazardous waste do they have? Howard Parsell: I think that's a fairly common issue for the Fire Department,but we don't handle any hazardous material at all. Basically, we carry electrical supplies for construction situations. Director Koontz: The Fire Department requirement for Haz-met business plans is standard. Every business in the County, and pretty much in all of California, has this in its business plan; whether they've got hazardous waste or not. At least, they acknowledge that in writing to the Fire Department. Commissioner McNaboe: Do you have any plans for passive lighting, heating or cooling? Howard Parsell: We're going to have to comply with energy conservation requirements. Chair Wilson: I would like to open up the public participation portion of the meeting and invite Patricia Farley to speak. Please state your name and address. PUBLIC TESTIMONY Patricia Farley 12513 Michigan Avenue 7 _ I am formerly opposing what I consider to be a very irresponsible mitigated negative declaration, which you are being asked to approve, for numerous reasons. This proposed project is on a specific plan, and there are certain legal regulations on the specific plan for this property. It is not to be broken off, developed separately. The plan that was submitted before, and already being legally challenged, put Essco expansion in Planning Area No. 2, not Planning Area No. 1. The City has consistently told the residents of this community that the reason for using all our tax money to buy up property to control this land was to prevent exactly what is being proposed here. I am very disgusted, both with the City and with Essco, for what has been going on for the last few years and where Essco is right now. It has very unsightly outdoor storage, which I don't believe they're supposed to have it where it is. It is not suppose to be in the zone where this is. Warehousing and outdoor storage is not supposed to be there. It is too big to be moved even closer to Michigan Street and residential property. The "OAC" Environmental Report specifically states that no permits will be issued for any building on the "OAC" project until circulation plans and grading plans are finalized, and payments for proper permits are made, etc. I have something right here saying that we're not going to have tilt-up buildings, and the pollution and transportation is suppose to be addressed, etc. Our Traffic Engineer doesn't even know from his report what street this building is on. A fee of$24,618.00 is supposed to be paid for improvements to roadways to the County before anything is approved. Chair Wilson: Your time is up. Patricia Farley: How can my time be over? I have 3 minutes. Chair Wilson: It's three minutes. Mr. Brian Phelps? Patricia Farley: Well, I would like to say one last summary thing. Chair Wilson: Sure. Patricia Farley: To tell me that this represents the Outdoor Adventures Center flies into the face of any intelligent person. Chair Wilson: Brian Phelps? Brian Phelps 2275 Ranch St. I only have a few things here. I am concerned about the outdoor storage. I know where it's at now. If it is going to be some outdoor storage, where will it be? Will it be near the forklift ramp there, will it be visible from the street? Will any of the HVAC equipment be visible from the street? Are they going to have good screening there? I would like to see some kind of cornice on the top of those buildings so they don't look quite like a tilt-up building. They look fine as they are. Better disguise that. I didn't see anything on their lighting plan and what it is going to look like. I don't know if that's coming later or not. In regards to the parking area in the front where the "will-call" area and such is, which ends right against the back wall of the adjacent building, I would prefer, maybe, some tall landscaping or something to break up the base of that concrete wall that is going to be seen on back of that other 8 building. Right now, it looks like it's just a wall that's going to be there. Perhaps some sort of landscaping area right there as well. Greg Goucher 12019 Honey Hill Drive I own Winnelson Company right across the street from Essco on the plan here. I also live in the City. I have absolutely nothing against Essco. I think they're good neighbors. On the City plan where it shows, and as Gary has already addressed, a median didn't show in there. I've been told that median is not going to be there, so I'm curious why it popped up again. Also, John was talking about a 4 ft. widening of the street. I was curious if that's just from one side of the road, the undeveloped side or if it's coming off with 2 ft. on each side. I don't know, maybe I misunderstood that, I'm note sure. I would like to get a clarification on that. One of the things I know that got brought up is outside storage, which is a critical feature for them as well as for us. I know that some people are speaking out against it, but I want them to see what the tax base is. Even though we sell wholesale plumbing supplies, and they sell wholesale electrical supplies, it doesn't mean that they are tax exempt. Virtually every contractor we sell to pays taxes. I think that's exactly what the City is looking for. They are a clean organization, and we are, too. Our hours are pretty similar, we're not open on the weekend, and we don't impact the City and that type of thing. One of the concerns, and I want to bring it up right now, is that they have outdoor storage like we do; and they've had to take some measures for theft, and so do we. Theft is a big concern down in that area, and I'd like to see if there's a way that we can propose some kind of solution to control that better. I'm not sure, exactly, what the answers are, but I know they've had problems, and we've had the problems with people coming over the fence and helping themselves. We're really not getting a great response from the Sheriffs Department on that. Thank you. Chair Wilson: Bobbie Forbes? Bobbie Forbes 11850 Burns Ave. I only frequent that neighborhood because of the skating rink, and as of late, in the last two months or so I notice that someone has started doing street storage. I don't know the particulars, but there all kinds of equipment or products that are sold; products used in construction stored in what I think is the street. I don't know if it is from Essco. It's embarrassing. My gosh! I don't know if you've been down there lately, but that's really embarrassing. So, the kids go down there, they party, they drive around, hang out and party in that little pocket. There are lots of places for them to hang out now, and I don't know if it's legal for them to be doing that. That's just one thing I am embarrassed about, that it is a business that's right in front of the community, and right around where the kids are. I don't know anything bad about Essco, so I can say that. If that's their storage, I don't think it should be out in the street right now or until this building is built and comes in place. I do wonder if this is what we're suppose to have as the welcoming mat to the Outdoor Adventures Center area, whenever that comes. Is that what we are going to see? That is what we're going to see, as soon as one turns down Michigan Street. It's a beautiful building, but is that what we want to project as a welcome to the neighborhood as the development comes. I think that's my biggest concerns, and that's just really important. We 9 need good outdoor lighting for that area, and when someone comes around the corner, are we going to see from the freeway to Michigan and Barton Road as you turn on all the other streets? Thank you. Chair Wilson: I would like the applicant to come up so that we don't lose track, and possibly address some of the questions. I'll just summarize a few here. First, the issue of outdoor storage, and I think it is well noted that you do have a potential for theft and so on. So, how is outdoor storage going to be handled? Can you address that for us? Howard Parsell 4854 Main St. Yorba Linda, CA All of the outdoor storage will be within that 8 foot wall. So, without the 8 foot wall, we can at lease have security with some tall trees. All the outdoor storage will be screened from public view. Lighting will be such that it will keep our property secure, but it will not be glaring into our neighbors' eyes. I'm not sure how I'm going to handle the theft problem, but I think the rolling gates and the 8 foot wall should help. Chair Wilson: I think that pretty much takes care of the various questions for the applicant. Director Koontz: One of the topics of discussion in the very beginning were the visual issues here and the outdoor storage, and we made it very clear to them that from the street, we didn't want to see stuff stacked up along here. If you're going to stack anything along this wall, it's going to be below the level of the wall. If there is an 8 foot wall, the view from the street is where you're looking up an 8 ft. wall, and we better not be seeing a lot of stuff above that wall. For anything that is high, we suggest they put it back in the corner, and we have told them to be very careful about how high they stack materials. In terms of the lighting plan, Condition 29 requires a full lighting plan. Chair Wilson: In terms of the question concerning the additional 4 feet of right-of-way. Director Koontz: That's primarily dedication for parkways, and the street is pretty much approved "as is". If you notice, this area along there is wider. That side already has that extra 4 feet, so we're asking for the extra 4 feet along this side also. Chair Wilson: That's a dedication. I see it. Thank you. Chair Wilson: One other item. Gary, let's just kind of review or summarize again the situation with the median. I remember the conversations, I remember the discussion, and what we had for our rationale, but why don't you go ahead and just state it again. Director Koontz: In terms of... Chair Wilson: The way the median is going to change down south. Director: Sorry, I didn't get that... 10 - Chair Wilson: The way the median is going to change. Director Koontz: The issue is part of the public hearings. I think this was brought up at both the public hearings for the Planning Commission and the City Council, whereby the existing businesses along the street were very concerned. One, they want to stay there and didn't want to be displaced. Neither the Commission, the staff, nor the Council wanted the displacement. So it was a matter of accommodating. So, there was an issue of, o.k., we've already got all the improvements in here, let's work with this the best we can. Once we get to the end here, then we'll start flaring out and adding additional right-of-ways so we can put in the median and all the other landscaping. The exhibit that you saw before still shows the median. That was the original exhibit in the Specific Plan, and that was not changed; but in discussions in meetings, hearings and all that,that was changed with this section right here. Chair Wilson: Might I mention, this body has entertained a median scheme for Barton Road from the freeway and going to the boundaries of the City. It's been a great deal of discussion with the.businesses in the area on a median that would stretch from, basically,the freeway all the way past the City Hall, but it was violently opposed. And, believe me, I think it's a good idea with the right kinds of release, but when we got into the issue of this particular area, there are pre-existing uses, and the use that is being proposed here is in accordance with the Outdoor Adventures Center. There is no surprise here that for what's being proposed, and because of the amount of traffic that will take place and the type of traffic, it was thought that the median condition would be introduced further down where you could gain the right-of-way. But,believe me,there's been a great deal of thought in relation to medians throughout the City. Director Koontz: We talked to Essco about the outdoor storage. They asked, "for a short term, can we just have an encroachment permit and fence that off because it doesn't go anywhere, and it is just a street that deadends?" They said, "we're looking in building a new building, and once we get that building built, everything is moving into that building." So, as an interim way to try to help them get through this issue, the City did issue a valid encroachment permit. The issue is they've got to keep it clean, and they've got to keep it safe. There's.insurance policies on it, and they've got like a 30-day notice, if we decide we want to get rid of them. But the big issue was, let them do this, operate their existing facility while they are planning and building this, and soon as this is built, all that goes away. Chair Wilson: What is the term of the encroachment permit? That's the term, basically, when this building is built, if it is built. Director Koontz: Right. At a minimum, I believe it's like one year and renewed month-to- month after that, or we can just tell them, "30 days, get out." Chair Wilson: The insurance policy covers the City in the event some individual crashes through into the outside storage? Director Koontz: It covers the City from any liability associated with any activity they are doing on that site. It's like a million dollar policy. 11 Chair Wilson: Is there anyone else who would like to come to the podium and voice their opinion in relation to this particular item? You're welcome, if you'd come to the podium, please. State your name and address. Bobbie Forbes 11850 Burns Ave. On that street, Commerce Way, where it leads down pass the skating rink, for quite a long time there was some type of vehicle with graffiti all over it. It wasn't really a motor home. It was some kind of a work vehicle. Does it belong to anybody in the room? Chair Wilson: Let's let staff address that Rich Shields: No, it didn't belong to anybody. We towed it. Bobbie Forbes: It wasn't a local vehicle? Rich Shields: No. Somebody just decided they were going to park it there. Bobbie Forbes: It was horrible. I'm glad to see that it is gone. I appreciate that. Chair Wilson: So the removal was an enforcement issue and you followed through on that. Director Koontz: Yes. We seriously focused on this whole area with code enforcements. A lot of people are parking things down there. The other issue is that at the next City Council meeting is going to be an action to redline in front of the industrial park south of Commerce along Michigan. All those big trailers parking there_is now, and it's really a site/distance problem. So, that's going before the Council in the next couple hearings. Chair Wilson: Anyone else who would like to speak? State your name and address. Brian Phelps 22857 Wren St. One additional question I have is regarding the landscaping on either side of all the driveways. Will any of the landscaping block the view for entering and exiting? I know because on the inside corners, that could be a tough view for any of the drivers that are exiting or entering there since that's going to be the entrance way to the Outdoor Adventures Center — at least one of them. I would have concerns about visual places for traffic there. Director Koontz: The answer to that is "no". On the landscape plan that we see, one of the issues that we always look at is sight/distance visibility, and because of truck traffic and all that, we will definitely be looking at that to make sure there wasn't anything real high to block that way. Chair Wilson: Anyone else who would like to speak on this item? Patricia Farley? Please state your name and address. 12 Patricia Farley 12513 Michigan Don't count it part of my minutes, please. Gary was just saying that the agreement was that they would not have outdoor storage, and they're telling you they're going to have outdoor storage, and I'm telling you the zoning says they're not suppose to have it; and, also, from the Environmental Impact Report for the "OAC", it says, specifically, that they are to construct Commerce Way from Michigan to Taylor at its ultimate cross-section with as a secondary highway and that's suppose to be done prior to Certificate of Occupancy for even the first building. So, I guess the summary to me is, I am totally frustrated as a resident that nobody is protecting our rights and our property as to who gets to rent out our streets. Not rent it, they get it for free. When is somebody going to represent us? Chair Wilson: Thank you. Anyone with any other comments or questions? Would staff like to address that issue? Greg Goucher 12019 Honey Hill Drive Regarding the comment about the truck, it did take a long time to get it out, but please don't judge our business or Superior or Essco by the semi's and the things that are parked across from the skating rink. Most of those trucks, in fact, all those trucks have nothing to do with us. The trucks that come in on a daily basis are contractors making deliveries. They don't have time to park semi trucks. That's one problem that I see possibly coming down the road for that being an in-and-out of the "OAC". It's that particular part of the street that is directly across from the skating rink, at the moment, on both sides, which is used for probably overnight storage or parking for some trucks. I think there's probably some residents in town who are over-the-road drivers. So, that might be a concern. The address, the outdoor storage, but if you drive by our place, you know what, we've grown, too. We're real happy to be here, it's a good spot to be. We have some stuff that, quite frankly, I didn't ever think it would be where it is right now. But, it's piled very high. To me, I like seeing it, because it means that we are busy; but, I'm sure some residents will drive by that might say it doesn't look real good. So, I don't know if there's some point where we can come to some kind of a solution. Maybe, we can go to a 12 ft. wall or something on our side, and we can probably live within those parameters; but there are some things I think that we can do, also. We're looking for the same -- for some help and solutions, too. If we have to raise a block wall or something, maybe there are some funds that we can share. Those are my thoughts. Thanks. Chair Wilson: Thank you. Please feel free to work with the staff in relation to that. Director Koontz: In response to your question, you may recall that this whole area along Commerce Way was included in the "OAC", and because we saw it as being the primary entrance into the area. We wanted to make sure that any new buildings that were constructed, landscaping, and the architecture provided some consistency with the "OAC The real "OAC" project is everything farther south of this. All the infrastructure is in, these are existing graded pads, and this is an existing business that wants to expand. They are just moving across the street. We saw this as being consistent. Anything farther south that is proposed, yes, all those 13 conditions, and all those requirements on undeveloped land definitely would apply. With this one, everything is already in. So, it's just what is existing. Chair Wilson: Would anyone else like to comment on this particular item? If not, we will bring it back to the Commission for discussion,votes, entertain a motion? Vice Chair Addington: Mr. Chairman, for starters, I would like to make a motion to condition the color palate on the building to match the brown and earth/tone colors that is shown on the rendering. MOTION PC-06-2006: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to approve the color palate on the color board presented to the Commission. Chair Wilson seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE PC-06-2006: Approved 5-0-0-0 MOTION PC-07-2006: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to approve SA-06-02 and V-06-01/E-06-02. Commissioner Comstock seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE PC-07-2006: Approved 5-0-0-0 ADJOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 8:00 pm CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION • INFORMATION TO THE COMMISSIONERS Director Koontz: This is the only item tonight, but if you recall at the last meeting, we talked about having a special joint City Council/Planning Meeting session. That was supposed to be last week. At the last minute, one of the applicants or proposed developer requested additional time to prepare a presentation. So, that meeting has been rescheduled for next Thursday. So, you should be receiving notification for the joint meeting. Chair Wilson: At what time, Gary? Director Koontz: That'll be at six o'clock,their standard meeting time,next Thursday. Chair Wilson: Are we going to end up with some more package material? Director Koontz: Oh, yes. Chair Wilson: O.k. Any other information for the Commissioners? 14 _ Commissioner Bidney: The meeting for the 13th? What does it entail for us. We'll get a package and have less than a week to review it? It's not before us yet. Director Koontz: What is going to happen, basically, is there will be a presentation by the two proposed developers. This part of the owners' participation issue, with redevelopment projects, and basically it's the Council trying to determine who they would like to see move forward with the project. The two developers are asked, "What are your qualifications, show us your experience, what's your financial backing, and can you actually perform and build a project?" We are not going to be looking at the project, because we don't have a project. All we are doing is selecting a developer. The Council has requested your attendance to provide input to them. So, you won't just be sitting up there, you will listen to the two presentations, ask questions, and then you folks will provide your input to the Council, and then they will make a decision. Commissioner Bidney: So,we're to be invited? Commissioner Comstock: No, it's going to be like the last time, looking at the plans and specifications. I was a little bit disappointed in both projects that were submitted. We're not going to be choosing one project or another--just the developer of the project. Director Koontz: You can't choose a project, because I don't have a project. I haven't done a CEQA analysis. I can't tell you the rights and wrongs or good and bad of anything. So, if you select a project, you kind of violated the whole system. Meaning, you can pick a developer, but you really can't pick a project. It's not, I like this, I like that. It's do you want this person to propose a development or do you want this person? And, then it has to go through the whole review process. Chair Wilson: In essence, we will not be making a choice. It will be the Council making the choice. Director Koontz: Right, but they've asked for your involvement. Chair Wilson: Make a recommendation... Director Koontz: As with a lot of things like specific plans, tract maps, and all that, you're making a recommendation to them anyway. So, this is just one big meeting where you will be making a similar recommendation. Chair Wilson: Now, I think I get the feeling that the purpose of the meeting really is to say Town Hall participation for a major in-fill project within the City, and I believe that's the point of this. Also, I believe it's a concept kind of interjection. Alright. Any other information to the Commissioners or from the Commissioners? • INFORMATION FROM THE COMMISSIONERS Vice Chair Addington: Couple of items. Our next meeting is on the 201h. Do you know what items we have on the agenda for that? 15 - Director Koontz: Yes. We've got Barney Karger's tract at the end of Pico, and we have the Lark Street antenna coming back. Vice Chair Addington: 01. Director Koontz: The City Attorney will be present for that meeting Vice Chair Addington: And are we planning a Planning Commission Meeting the first week in May? Director Koontz: No. Vice Chair Addington: Thank you. Chair Wilson: Any other comments from the Commissioners? ADJOURNED PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 8:00 PM NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON APRIL 20.2006 Respectfully Submitted, , Gary L. Koontz, Pldiwfing Director Doug Wilson, Chairman Planning Commission 16