Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout052704 DH Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DIRECTOR OF PLANNING MAY 27, 2004 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Director's Hearing was called to order on Thursday, May 20, 2004, at 1 :30 PM, in the Main Conference Room, located at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Principal Planner Don Hazen presiding. Also present were Associate Planner Dan Long, Assistant Planner and Minute Clerk Adria McClanahan. Item No.1: Plannina Application No. PA03-0709 A Development Plan to construct a 6.500 soft sinale-storv office! restaurant buildina on a 1.03 acre site within the Vail Ranch Town Square. Located at the southwest corner of State Hwv 79 & Mahlon Vail Road. Principal Planner Don Hazen called the meeting to order at 1 :33 PM. Associate Planner Dan Long presented an overview indicating the project is part of a larger shopping center, previously approved by the County of Riverside. The project is an area that has been annexed by the City of Temecula. The City has honored previous approvals from the County. The applicant has chosen to revise the orientation of the building changing it from a single-tenant to a multi-tenant structure including a restaurant with a drive-through window. The primary issue for staff was the visibility of the drive-through from Highway 79 Planner Long, stated Staff has presented a plan that is ready to be approved with conditions. The applicant has bermed the front setback between the building and Highway 79 South. The ordering window has been relocated away from the office building. In addition the applicant has added a trellis over the drive-thru window thereby providing acceptable screening for the drive- up facility. The addition to the project is now able to provide a courtyard setting to allow for outdoor seating and dining. The entryway to the office building has been enhanced with columns. Staff has added condition # 13 which reads "The trellis over the drive-through windows shall be planted with vines, subject to the approval of the Planning Director"'. That would present a greenery effect screening the drive-up window. Staff has also added landscape conditions including the size of the trees. The minimum widths of the planters are to be five feet for the interior dimension. Planner Long stated the applicant has also submitted an application for a Sign Program for the entire shopping center. Item #11 in the Conditions of Approval was verbally changed to include "Prior to issuance of any Sign Permit." Associate Planner stated that the project was consistent with the EIR adopted with the Vail Ranch Specific Plan and recommends approval of the project. Principal Planner, Don Hazen questioned Item # 20 on the Conditions of Approval. The percentage of the size trees should be reflected on the actual landscape plans submitted to Staff. The current landscape plans submitted, per Principal Planner Hazen, did not meet P:\PLANNING\DIRHEAR\MINUTES\2004\O5-27-04 minutes.doc , condition # 20. Principal Planner Hazen also questioned the large circles on the south elevations of the Site Plan. Per Planner Long, the large round circles were planters. Principal Planner Hazen opened Public Hearing at 1 :39 PM. Kevin Cafagne, representing Square One Development, 1250 Activity Drive #C, Vista, California, 92081, discussed Item# 4C under General Requirements in the Conditions of Approval. He wanted to know if the installation of the underground double detector was a new requirement implemented by the city. Richard Benson, 6310 Greenwich Drive, San Diego, Ca 92122, representing Benson & Bohl Architects, had questions concerning item 4A and 4C under General Requirements in the Conditions of Approval, with regard to the screening of the utilities. Utilities have been shown on the site plan and include an above grade transformer in a certain location is screened with a tree and with shrubs around it. The detector check is in a planting area so it can be screened per previous discussions with Staff. The condition for an underground detector is new according to their understanding. The previous approval from the County of Riverside did not require this condition. Associate Planner, Long, addressed both questions. Item#4C is a Planning Department Condition. However, the condition will be revised to include "screening subject to the approval of Planning Director." Principal Planner requested Associated Planner Long address question concerning item # 4A. Associated Planner, Long responded that locations of transformers are determined by Southern California Edison. Sometimes they cannot be located in the rear. Sometimes they are to be placed in prominent locations. Staff will work with applicant to make sure screening is acceptable. Per Associate Planner, Long, screening will fulfill intent of item #4A. Mr. Benson addressed minor issue of yellow based color on the exterior of the building. Sample of a deeper color was initially submitted. Mr. Benson wanted to make sure the most recent color is acceptable. Per Associate Planner, Long, item# 8 shall include "added conditions shall comply with the color board submitted to staff." There were some discussions on changing the colors of the building. Since the County of Riverside previously approved the entire center had a common theme and color. Staff decided to modify color to match the buildings in the center while not being an outcast. The applicant agreed. The colors now being proposed will blend effectively with the shopping center. Staff recommends approval of the colors. Principal Planner, Hazen called for any other requests to speak. Mickey Cafagna of Square One Development was late to arrive and wanted to make sure item #4C was addressed. No other questions were asked Principal Planner, Hazen presented several concerns during which time the Public Hearing remained opened. The concerns were as follows: 1. The City's policies with regard to the design of drive-thru's. According to Planning Commission's Design Standards, the plan is not consistent with policy. The drive-thru parallel to Highway 79 must show a cross-section to verify the fact that the berming and P:\PLANNINGIDIRHEAR\MINUTES\2004\O5-27-04 minutes.doc 2 the landscaping would fully screen the vehicles that would be stacked up in the drive- thru lane. There must be maintenance requirements on hedging. Cross-section would provide clear assessment of whether or not berming and landscaping is sufficient. 2. The Pick-up window in the drive-thru lane requires more than just trellis and landscaping to provide adequate screening. Planning Commission policy is requesting complete architectural extension of the building out over the drive-thru pick-up window. The intent being that while it is a drive thru, it should not look like a drive-thru building. There must be a cross-section of the screening along the drive-thru. 3. The landscape plan does not show the sidewalk. Assuming the trees shown on the plans, can be juggled around the sidewalk, verification from the City's Landscape architect is needed. There is a question concerning the consistency of the two plans which is resulting in a conflict. 4. The review of the project is incomplete without the updated Color Board. Principal Planner recommended a continuance to allow the applicant to provide the cross- section drawings and have the architect look at providing type of articulation along the pick-up area, per Planning Commission. The planters are insufficient screening. Staff is looking for a type of trellis over the patio to provide articulation of the building and partial shading and filtered sun-light over some of the seating areas on the patio which enhances the view of the shopping center from within. Discussion ensued between Richard Benson, Mickey & Kevin Cafagna and Principal Planner Hazen concerning the Principal Planner's decision to continue item for two weeks. The applicants disagreed with the Principal Planner, stating they have complied with the Planning Director and Planning Staff. They did not see a need to continue the item. However after further discussions, agreed to a continuance for two weeks. No further requests to speak were presented. Principal Planner Hazen continued PA03-0709 to June 10,2004 at 1 :30 PM. There being no further business, meeting was adjourned at 2:15 PM. P:\PLANNINGIDIRHEAR\MINUTES\2004\O5-27-04 minutes.doc 3 DIRECTOR'S HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the Minute Clerk. Thank You! Date: !$- 7....:íl"" 0 ~ I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.: For D Against D Subject: Name: VI, C-l~ ~ A Address: S&""'A ~~ Phone: City/StatelZip: If you are representing r group, please give the name: The Planning Director wi call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Thank you! DIRECTOR'S HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the Minute Clerk. Thank You! 5"""/27 fð"l I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.: (6~ ~tLI~ For D Against [3' L/ - C. Subject: '\ (J-1'~~<.M& T"::hDUh \02 D¿t'Gd'or c....~c \C.. V~ (J C. Date: Name: j" e.J,:) fA ~ """- Address: \z..Çð A::J...'(.?I ~I 'C:r ~ c.... I Phone: 7c:.c!> "", ......-9'8 ~ 9'<../'7:5. City/StatelZip: V'5 f-.-(e-Pr J ~ 2c:Þ81 If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: 5r(,l~- ~1Att!.... Oel..<P \",PI1lAJ..vd- The Planning Director will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Thank you! Date: Subject: fIr17fS DIRECTOR'S HEARING REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the Minute Clerk. Thank You! .!; . 1-&. (J 1-- I wish to speak on Agenda Item No.: For c:r Against D V It I ¿, ~ T1"3't<J IV ~ v I'I1L Name: Address: Phone: Þ tJ#rTZÐ 13m ~ þ~/o ~.;.JI¡)IßI.f PI?. Ø5Ø '~. 5"1'11 City/StatelZip: SfDJ PlfhO CIr 921Ð- If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The Planning Director will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Thank you!