HomeMy WebLinkAbout082597 PC Minutes MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 25, 1997
CALl TO ORDr=R
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in an adjourned regular
session at 6:00 P.M., on Monday, August 25, 1997, in the City Council Chambers
of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ROLLCALl
Present:
Commissioners Guerriero, Miller, Slaven, Soltysiak,
and Chairwoman Fahey.
Absent:
None.
Also Present:
Planning Manager Ubnoske,
Principal Engineer Parks,
Senior Planner Hogan,
Attorney Curley, and
Minute Clerk Ballreich.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. APPROVAl OF AGENDA
MOTION: Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Siaven, moved for the
approval of the Agenda as submitted. Voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
2. DIRECTOR'S HF4RING UPDATE
Received and filed. No additional information.
2
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
PU;LIC Hr:ARINGS
P! A, NNIN~ APPI ICATICIN NO. PA96-0~70 (D!=VE! OPM!=NT pI AN -
R!:VISION
Planning Commission consideration to relocate the north access driveway southerly
and to modify the design of both driveways to allow full movement at the south
driveway and right-turn only on the north driveway.
R!::COMM!=NDATION
To grant the Categorical Exemption for Planning Application No. PA 96-0270 and
to adopt Resolution No. 97- approving the revision to Planning Application No.
PA96-0270 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and
subject to the Conditions of Approval. Reviewing the staff report (of record), Senior
Planner Hogan advised that because of the proposed location of the Overland Drive
extension and Margarita Road, a relocation of the northern driveway is being
requested by the Public Works Department as well as a restriction to right-turn only
in and out movements of the subject site.
Principal Engineer Parks noted that minimal changes to the plan will address the
above-mentioned issues.
At this time, Chairwoman Fahey opened the public hearing. There being no public
input, Commissioner Guerriero offered the following motion:
MOTICON: Commissioner Guerriero moved to close the public hearing and to grant
the Categorical Exemption for Planning Application No. PA 96-0270 and to adopt
Resolution No. 97- approving the revision to Planning Application No. PA96-0270
based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to
the Conditions of Approval. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slaven
and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A REVISION TO
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0270 TO RELOCATE
AND REDESIGN THE ACCESS DRIVEWAYS FOR THE
SOLANA APARTMENTS, A 312-UNIT APARTMENT
COMPLEX WITH RECREATION AMENITIES ON FOUR
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
3
PARCELS CONTAINING 18.7 ACRES LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOLANA WAY AND
MARGARITA ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NOS. 92-090-023, -024, -025, AND -039
p! ANNIN~ APPi ICATION NO. 97-0036 (D!=VF:! OPM!=NT conr=
AMFNnMFNT)
Planning Commission consideration of an amendment to the Development Code to
revise the Approval Authority Table.
R!=COMMFNnATION
To adopt PC Resolution No. 97- amending Chapter 17 of the Temecula Municipal
Code to revise the Approval Authority Table.
Associate Planner Naaseh reviewed the staff report (as per written material of
record), noting the following:
that the currant parking standards for a self-storage facility is 1 space per 25
units plus.two3 spaces for.each caretaker; that the proposed amendment
would modify .the parking standards to 1 space per 200 units; that staff
derived at the proposed standard by researching standards of other cities;
that usually individuals park in front of each individual unit to load and
unload;
that because the new Development Code requires the filing of two
applications (Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit ) and in order
to expedite the approval process, staff is requesting that the Director be
allowed to approve Conditional Use Permits for new buildings under 10,000
square feet; that there would be no additional cost to the applicant for filing
two applications;
that Director headngs are public hearings and that notification is within 300'
of the subject site; that Planning Commission projects are notified 600' from
the subject site
At this time, Chairwoman Fahey invited public input to which there was no
response.
4
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
Commissioner Slaven voiced no objection to the Director approving Conditional Use
Permits for new buildings under 10,000 square feet as long as the notification
requirement is expanded to 600' instead of 300'.
Although voicing no objection, Planning Manager Ubnoske advised that the
Development Code reflects a notification requirement for Director Hearings at 300'.
'It was noted that if it were the consensus of the Commission to extend this
requirement to 600', Section 17.03.040 of the Development Code will have to be
amended.
Commissioner Miller relayed concern with regard to the proposed parking standard
(1 space per 200 units) and recommended that a minimum of four parking spaces
be provided (3 regular parking spaces and 1 handicapped parking space).
Because the requirement of 20% landscaping of open spaca would economically
prohibit the construction of storage facilities,. Senior Planner Hogan advised that
this percentage was reduced to10%. In response to Commissioner Miller's
comments, discussion ensued with regard to the flexibility of the 10% requirement
in the industrial zone where, for instance, a particular site may not have a rear
setback and, therefore, in order to meet the 10% requirement, may provide
landscaping in locations where not appropriate just to meet the requirement. It was
the consensus of the Planning Commission that the applicant be required to
landscape setbacks.
Referencing Agenda Item No. 5 (construction of a self-storage
facility),Commissioner Miller noted that the proposed 10' rear setback would be
creating a no man's land; therefore, he suggested that the 10' rear setback be
eliminated by moving the project further back and increasing the front setback to
20'.
MOTION: Commissioner Miller moved to close the public hearing and to approve
PC Resolution No. 97- as amended.
PC R!=SO! UTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO REVISE THE APPROVAL AUTHORITY TABLE,
REQUIRE CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR RECREATIONAL ZONING
5
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
DISTRICTS, INDOOR SWAP MEETS IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, AND AUTOMOBILE OIL
CHANGE/LUBE SERVICES IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS, TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT
FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS
AND PERMIT THEM IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS, PERMIT
GREATER SETBACK ADJUSTMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL CUL-DE-SAC
LOTS, ESTABUSH MOTORCYCLE PARKING SPACE DIMENSIONS AND
STANDARDS, ESTABLISH SELF-STORAGE/MINI-WAREHOUSE
STANDARDS, AND OTHER MINOR CLASSIFICATIONS TO THE
DEVELOPMENT CODE (PLANNING APPUCATION NO. PA97-0036).
Amend
O
O
O
that the notification.requirement for Conditional Use Permits be
extended to 600';
that the parking standard for self-storage/mini-warehouse standards
be amended to a minimum of four spaces (3 regular parking spaces
and one handicapped space);
that all setbacks be landscaped.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slaven and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
P! ANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-01P7 (CONDITIONAL USE P!=RMIT)
Planning Commission consideration to construct and operate an 85,487 square
foot self-storage facility (580 units) including an office and manager's residential
unit on a 3.26 acre site for Temecula Self Storage.
RECOMMENDATION
To adopt a Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA97-0127; to adopt
the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA97-0127; and to
adopt Resolution No. 97- recommending approval of Planning Application No.
PA97-0127 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and
subject to the Conditions of Approval.
Senior Planner Hogan reviewed the staff report (of record), advising that those
amendments approved in Agenda Item No. 4 (Development Code Amendment) are
reflected in the staff report, including the 1{7 landscaped setback; that the proposed
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
6
use would be an appropriate use for this particular area; that the subject use would
provide some additional screening to the residential units (to the rear) from other
future commercial activities on Ynez Road; that the subject building will not block
the residents current mountain view; that approximately 12% of landscaping has
been proposed; and that lot coverage will be within approved standards (60%).
Planner Hogan advised that staff had received four letters of opposition to the
proposed use from the neighboring auto dealers, noting their concern relative to the
approval of non-automotive use. He noted that auto dealers are of the opinion that
the entire Ynez Road Corridor should be automobile-oriented developments.
Having reviewed the auto dealers' request, Planner Hogan stated that staff was of
the opinion that the proposed use would be a better transitional use to the
neighboring residential units and noted that the approval of the proposed use would
have no future impact on a continuation of automobile-oriented businesses along
the Ynez Road Corridor. Providing additional information with regard to the
proposed project, Planner Hogan noted the following:
that there is an existing Preschool located to the north of the subject site;
that the site of discussion has already been graded;
that the existing private road is approximately 400' from Ynez Road;
that an application has been submitted for the operation of a restaurant to
the northwest of the subject site;
that the General Plan does no designate any specific area for auto sales
only;
that efforts will be undertaken to ensure proposed landscaping will be
compatible with the existing landscaping at the Preschool.
At this time, Chairwoman Fahey opened the public hearing.
By way of handouts, Mr. Ken Honig, applicant, 123 E. Bay Front, Balboa Island; Mr.
Ariel Valli, 19700 Fairchild, #200, Irvine, architect representing the applicant; and
Mr. Randy Fleming, 43500 Ridge Park Drive, #202, Temecula, reviewed the
proposed project, highlighting the following: that a facility such as the proposed is
needed in the community; that because of accessibility, the proposed location is
ideal for the proposed use; that the project will be low in profile and will be a quiet
use; that the maximum amount of traffic generated will be 6 to 9 vehicle trips on a
Saturday and Sunday mornings; that adequate screening will be provided; that by
way of design and actual maintenance, the 10' rear setback will be maintained to
ensure appropriate aesthetic appearance; that although not visible to the public,
some landscaping would be necessary in the rear setback to ensure proper root
structure; that this 10° rear setback (no man's land) is not desirous but is being
constructed as the request of the City; that the proposed landscaping plan is strictly
7
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
conceptual; that each unit has an alarm; that the alarm, dudng business hours, will
only be activated in the office with no audible sound and that after hours, the alarm,
if activated, would be audible for approximately 30 seconds outside of the building;
and that all lighting will be directed down and not visible off site.
Chairwoman Fahey clarified that because of the previously taken action with regard
to the Development Code (Agenda Item No. 4), moving the structure 10' further
back, eliminating the 10' rear setback, would not be a feasible alternative at this
point. It was noted by staff that if it were determined that the amended
Development Code standards were not effective for one or any site, the Code could
again be amended and/or a variance may be requested.
Staff clarified that the Development Code requires a 25' setback when a commercial
use abuts a residential use (such as proposed) but that this setback requirement
was amended to 10' in the previous action (Agenda Item No. 4), noting that the
Director would have the flexibility between the minimum of 10' and the maximum of
25'. It was staff's opinion that a 10' setback would be adequate for the proposed
use.
To ensure building joints are propedy covered, especially on the front wall of the
building, Commissioner Miller suggested the imposition of a Condition requiring the
applicant to plaster the front wall if joints were not properly coated. The applicant
voiced no objection to such a condition. Commissioner Miller, echoed by
Commissioner Soitysiak, encouraged the Building Department to address the
effectiveness of proposed drainage at the rear of the subject site. Commissioner
Miller as well expressed concern with regard to there being no deterrent preventing
children from jumping onto the roof at the rear of the subject site. Mr. Valli apprised
the Commissioners of the existing 6' wall behind the proposed facility; noted that
an additional wall would be constructed behind the facility; and advised that
undesirable plantings (thorn bushes, etc.) would be planted in the rear setback to
eliminate any undesirable element. Mr. Honig noted that on the north and south
sides of the facility, wrought iron fence would be constructed.
For Commissioner Miller, it was noted by staff that wall caps on the roof were
provided for accent purposes.
MOTION: Commissioner Miller moved to close the public hearing and to approve
staff recommendation with the addition of one condition, as follows:
8
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
Add
that if the coating material used on the extedor surface of the front wall fails
to propedy eliminate the visibility of joints, the applicant be required to
plaster the front wall.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slaven and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.-
Although he supported the motion, Commissioner Guerriero noted concern with the
imposition of such a condition, noting that, in his opinion, the Commission would
have to place such a condition of all future projects.
At 7:37 P.M., Chairwoman Fahey called a short recess and reconvened the meeting
at 7:45 P.M.
pIANNING APPIICATION NO. PA97-0138 03!=VIFLOPMENT PLAN)
Planning Commission consideration to construct and operate a 18,160 square
'foot industrial warehouse and office building.
RECOMMENDATION
To adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA97-O138; to
adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No. PA97-0138;
and to adopt PC Resolution No. PA97- recommending approval of Planning
Application No. PA97-0138 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the
staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval.
Senior Planner Hogan provided the staff report (as per written material of record),
advising that the proposed architectural enhancements will be set away several feet
from the building; that these enhancements are made of concrete; and that they will
be attached to the building.
Mr. Russell Rumansoff, architect representing the applicant, noted that the
architectural enhancements were proposed in order to define the entryway of the
building; confirmed that the enhancement extends out from the buildings; that they
are attached to the building; advised that at the entryway, the roof extends over to
9
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
the enhancement, providing coverage; and bdefiy reviewed the color board as well
as the landscaping plan.
In response to Commissioner Soltysiak's noted concern with regard to the grading
plan, Principal Engineer Parks ensured that these issues would be properly
addressed in the Precise Grading Plan..
Chairwoman Fahey, echoed by her fellow Commissioners, commented on the
difficulty of understand the submitted plans. Concurring with Chairwoman Fahey's
comment, Commissioner Slaven stated that any future applications with similar
difficulties will be tabled until complete.
MOTION: Commissioner Slaven moved to close the public hearing and to approve
with the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval.
PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA97-0224 (TI=NTATIVI= PARCEl MAP)
Planning Commissioner consideration to allow an existing commercial center of
4.59 acres to be subdivided into four lots, and a Variance request to allow two of
the parcels to be smaller than the minimum lot size requirement of 30,000 square
feet.
RECOMMENDATION
To adopt the Negative Declaration for Planning Application No. PA97-0129 and No.
97-0224; to adopt a PC Resolution No. 97- Approving Planning Application No.
97-0129 and No. 97-0224 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the
staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval.
RESOIl UTION NO. 97-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING
APPUCATIONNO. 97-0129 FOR A FOUR LOT TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP OF AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL CENTER
AND PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 97-0224 FOR A
VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO OF THE
PROPOSED PARCELS TO BE SMALLER THAN THE
MINIMUM LOT SiZE REQUIREMENT OF 30,000 SQUARE
FEET, LOCATED ON RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
10
BETWEEN LYNDIE LANE AND MORAGA ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-310..019.
Commissioner Miller noted that he would be abstaining with regard to this request.
Senior Planner Hogan reviewed the staff report (of record), advising that proposed
Condition No. 15a should read as follows:
The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of
Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works:
The Developer shall install or provide a cash deposit for half-width raised
landscaped median on Ranch California Road (Arterial Highway Standards -
110' R/W) from Moraga Road to Lyndie Lane. Plans shall be reviewed and
approved by the Department of Public Works. A left turn in movement from
Rancho California Road to the existing driveway will be allowed upon
construction of the raised median. A left turn out movement onto Rancho
California Road will not be allowed with the installation of the raised median.
Senior Planner Hogan advised that the original plans reflected a Speedy Lube for
the undeveloped parcel but noted that currently no such application has been
submitted; that the requested variance is for the lot size; and that parking
requirements are met by way of reciprocal parking agreements throughout the site.
Principal Engineer Parks, for Commissioner Soltysiak, advised that until the raised
medians are constructed, no left-turn in and out movements will be restricted. For
Commissioner Guerriero, Engineer Parks noted that because Lyndie Lane is a T-
intersection at Rancho California Road, a signal is provided, making it safer to
complete left-turn movements. Mr. Parks also advised that Lyndie Lane could
handle the additional traffic potentially generated as a result of this approval.
Mr.' Larry Markham, representing the applicant, requested that the following
verbiage be added to the end of Condition Nos. 15a and 15b: "...will not be allowed
with the installation of the raised median as determined by the Director of Public
Works.' Planning Manager Ubnoske requested that Mr. Markham's recommended
verbiage be further amended to also include the Director of Community
Developments. No objection was noted by the Commissioners. Because of limited
space and because of associated cost, Mr. Markham suggested the use of cobble
stone instead of actual landscaping in the median.
11
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
Chairwoman Fahey, echoed by her fellow Commissioners, advised that the
proposed conditions of approval will assist with accomplishing very needed
improvements.
MOTICSN: Commissioner Slaven moved to close the public hearing and to approve
staff recommendation as amended.
Add
O
that the verbiage Directors of Public Works and Community
Developments be added to the end of Condition Nos. 15a and 15b.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval with the exception of Commissioner Miller who abstained.
PLANNING MANAG!=R'S RI=PORT
Planning Manager Ubnoske informed the Commissioners that Mr. Knute Noland has
bccn hired as the City's Development Processing Coordinator. She also advised
that a Fire Marshal, as a contract position, has been hired.
PLANNING COMMISSION nlSCUSSION
Commissioner Slaven requested that staff investigate those parking lots which have
been newly slurry sealed to ensure that the required handicapped parking spaces
are appropriately restriped and signs are reposted.
Commissioner Slaven requested that once the Development Code Amendments are
completed and appropriate corrections have been made, she be given a hard
bound copy.
For clarity purposes, Commissioner Miller requested that any future amendments
to the Code be clearly spelled out (currently existing and proposed).
Commissioner Miller apprised staff that the trash enclosures, located behind the
theaters, are not being appropriately used.
In response to Commissioner Guerriero's request to provide larger sample boards
to the Commission, Planning Ubnoske apprised the Commissioners of changes that
will have to be made to the City's filing requirements and that once these changes
have been made, the Commission could expect to see larger sample boards within
12
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997
the next two to three months. In closing, Commissioner Guerriero requested that
staff provide information with regard to the different types of texture coatings used
in the industry in an effort to keep the Commissioners apprised.
ADJr'}~ IRNMr=NT
At 8:40 P.M., Chairwoman Fahey formally adjoumed the Planning Commission
meeting to Monday, September 8, 1997, at 6:00 P.M. (Because of the Labor Day
Holiday, the September 1, 1997, Planning Commission meeting was canceled
and rescheduled to September 8, 1997).
Planning Manager Ubnoske
13
Planning Commission
August 25, 1997