The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About092192 PC MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order Monday, September 21, 1992, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California, Chairman Linda Fahey presiding. PRESENT: 4 ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey COMMISSIONERS: Blair Also present were Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh, Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske and Minute Clerk Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSION BUSINESS Approval of AQenda It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Ford to approve the agenda. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair A[~oroval of Minutes of AuQust 17, 1992 It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Ford to approve the minutes of August 17, 1992 as mailed. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey PCMIN9/21/92 - 1 - 10/21/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Develooment Code It was moved by Commissioner Ford, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to appoint Commissioner Chiniaeff as Planning Commission representative to the Development Code Committee. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair Commissioner Blair arrived at 6:10 P.M. Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey 4. Noise Ordinance John Meyer presented the staff report. Chairman Fahey questioned where the issue of the noise ordinance originated from. Gary Thornhill advised that it originally came as a result of problems occurring at the School District bus maintenance facility. Mr. Thornhill added that staff does not feel the ordinance being presented deals with the kinds of problems it should address, therefore staff would prefer to postpone action on this item until completion of the noise element portion of the General Plan. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to postpone action on this item until completion of the Noise Element portion of the General Plan. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN9/21/92 -2- 10/21/92 PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Plot Plan No. 245 Proposed erection of one V-Type outdoor advertising display on the east side of Winchester Road, approximately 1,200 feet north of the intersection of Nicholas Road and Winchester Road. Plot Plan No. 246 Proposed erection of one V-Type outdoor advertising display on the east side of Winchester Road, approximately 1,850 feet north of the intersection of Nicholas Road and Winchester Road. Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:15 P.M. Michelle Adams, Adams Advertising, 19081 Rocky Road, Santa Ana, stated that the most important issue was whether or not this is a hardship case. Ms. Adams stated the hardship is necessitated by the processing time at Riverside County. Based on hardships incurred by the landowner, who at the time of application had a legally zoned piece of property; the community has suffered a hardship due to the fact that several local advertisers had expressed an interest in advertising on these signs; and Adams has incurred a economic hardship because the signs should have been approved 2 1/2 years ago. It was moved by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to close the public hearing at 6:35 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. 92-(next) denying Plot Plan No. 245, Amendment No. 1 and Plot Plan No. 246, Amendment No. 1 based on findings 1 through 4, page 6 and 7 as identified in staff report The motion carried as follows: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: I COMMISSIONERS: Ford Commissioner Ford clarified that he voted against the motion because he did not feel that due process was followed. Specific Plan I (Campos Verdes) Change of Zone 5617 Environmental Impact Report No. 348 PCMIN9/21/92 -3- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 Specific Plan 263 {Temecula Recjional Center) Change of Zone 5589 Environmental Impact Report No. 340 Sr~ecific Plan 255 (Winchester Hills) ChanQe of Zone 5532 Environmental Impact Report No. 324 Tentative Parcel MaD 25213 Vesting Tentative Tract MaD 25214 VestinQ Tentative Tract Mar) 25215 Vesting Tentative Parcel MaD 25321 Vesting Tentative Parcel MaD 25322 Vesting Tentative Parcel Mar) 25323 Vesting Tentative Parcel MaD 24324 Vesting Tentative Parcel MaD 25464 Gary Thornhill advised that the applicant has requested this item be moved off-calendar until November. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to continue off-calendar Specific Plan 1 (Campos Verdes), Change of Zone 5617, Environmental Impact Report No. 348; Specific Plan 263 (Temecula Regional Center), Change of Zone 5589, Environmental Impact Report No. 340; Specific Plan 255 (Winchester Hills), Change of Zone 5532, Environmental Impact Report No. 324; Tentative Parcel Map 25213; Vesting Tentative Tract Map 25214; Vesting Tentative Tract Map 25215; Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 25321; Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 25322; Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 25323; Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 24324; Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 25464. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 7. Public Use Permit No. 5 Request for approval of a church including a multi-purpose worship center building and a Sunday School building on 2.93 acres located on the southeast corner of Santiago Road and Ynez Road. Saied Naaseh presented the staff report and advised that the correct name of the applicant is New Community Lutheran Church. PCMIN9/21/92 -4- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:55 P.M. Louis Todd, 30645 Southern Cross Road, Temecula, member of Newhope Lutheran Church and Chairman of the construction committee requested the Commissions support of the request. Chris Winther, 50001 September Street, San Diego, attorney for the applicant, provided an overview of the CC&R's of the Los Ranchitos Homeowners Association. Tim Holt, The Holt Group, 275 N. Elsehoe, Temecula, architect for the project, gave an overview of the development. Vince DiDonato, Alhambra Group, 27412 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, landscape architect for the project, provided an overview of the landscape design. The following individuals expressed their opposition to the project: Don Rohrabacher, 44281 Flores Drive, Temecula Linda Campbell, 28750 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula Naytee Davis, 28895 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula Jack Fox, 28921 Ynez Road, Temecula John Marshall, 43930 Flores Drive, Temecula Jim Meyler, 29930 Santiago Road, Temecula R. E. Neimeyer, 29962 Santiago Road, Temecula Bobbie Principe, 28960 Ynez Road, Temecula Paul Principe, 28960 Ynez Road, Temecula Mike Santoro, 30275 Jedediah Smith Road, Temecula Terri Gassen, 44501 Verde Drive, Temecula Bob Campbell, 28750 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula John Pepe, 28980 Vallejo Avenue, Temecula Robert Burns, 30112 & 30110 Santiago Road, Temecula Barbara Ogle, 30052 Santiago Road, Temecula The following concerns were expressed: Traffic generated from development, inappropriateness of institutional facility in a rural neighborhood, noise and lighting pollution, bells and/or music generated by the bell tower, devaluation of property, inappropriateness of block walls and sidewalks in "country living" atmosphere, off-site parking problems and the number of churches already existing in this area. Louis Todd addressed the following issues: the 1967 CC&R's set aside Lot 86 with special conditions stating that the use potential could be commercial; property is located on the corner of a proposed major intersection; parking requirements are conditioned in the staff report and Condition 29 states that there will be no on street parking on Santiago, Ynez or Vallejo; the traffic study reflects that there will be no PCMIN9/21/92 -5- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 significant traffic impacts on the area; lighting has been conditioned under 5, 34 and 35; devaluation of property values is a subjective issue, however, the applicant can present documentation which reflects that churches increase property values; block walls were conditioned by staff and there will be no bells or music from the bell tower. Commissioner Chiniaeff stated he feels the Los Ranchitos neighborhood is already heavily impacted by churches and the school and the placement of another church would be a big burden on the community. Commissioner Blair stated she feels that the representatives of the proposed church have cooperated in addressing the issues expressed. Commissioner Ford stated he does not have a problem with the church in this location, however he did express concern with traffic impacts to Vallejo. Commissioner Ford questioned the traffic being limited to Santiago. Robert Righetti advised that Ynez Road and Santiago Road will be conditioned for 88 + foot right-of-way to match the General Plan. He added that the sidewalk along Vallejo has been eliminated. It was moved by Commissioner Ford, seconded by Commissioner Blair to refer Public Use Permit No. 5 back to staff with direction to prepare a study of the direct traffic impacts to Vallejo, parking and ingress/egress for future Commission consideration. Commissioner Chiniaeff stated he feels the issue is one of land use compatibility. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Ford NOES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to close the public hearing at 8:25 P.M. and Adopt Negative Declaration for Public Use Permit No. 5 and direct staff to prepare a Resolution denying Public Use Permit No. 5, based on the following: the project would be in conflict with the future General Plan; the project may have a detrimental effect on the health, safety and general welfare of the community due to traffic, noise and light/glare affects; the proposed project is not compatible with the surrounding land use due to the requirement for block walls as a buffer for this use with the single family residences and the area is already impacted by a number of churches along Santiago Road. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Fahey, Hoagland PCMIN9/21/92 -6- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 NOES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Ford Commissioner Ford stated he was not voting for or against the project, however he was voting against the denial because he feels that some of the issues could be mitigated and prior to making a decision based on the material that was provided, further studies are needed for clarification. Tentative Tract MaD No. 25277 and Change of Zone No. 5724 Saied Naaseh presented the staff report. Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 8:50 P.M. Larry Markham, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula, representing the applicant, Acacia Construction, thanked staff for all their efforts. Mr. Markham advised that the applicant would concur with all the conditions except for Condition No. 87 and Condition No. 94. Mr. Markham suggested alternative wording as follows, "Prior to the issuance of building permits, financing shall be in place for the construction of the expansion, realignment or replacement of the Pala Bridge over Temecula Creek." Rick Snyder, Acacia Construction, 22390 Mission Hills Lane, Yorba Linda, concurred with the statements made by Larry Markham and provided an overview of the project. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the request: Nancy Backstrand, P.O. Box 923, Fallbrook (representing Friends of the Santa Margarita River), expressed the following concerns: no mitigation was provided for handling first flush pollutants; no provision for detaining excess water run-off so that it can recharge the basin; and the effects on wildlife. Andrew Hovane¢, 31018 Shaba Circle, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concerns regarding traffic, noise and light pollution. Coralyn Knopp, 41843 Shorewood Court, Temecula (representing U.R.G.E.), expressed concern for water run-off effects on the Murrieta Creek. Don White, 31109 Via Gilberto, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concern with the grading, density, traffic volumes along Via Gilberto and Pala Road and decrease in property values. Carol Powell, 45884 Hopactong, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), concurred with Mr. Whites comments and added that the safety of children who play and pick-up school buses along Via Gilberto are concerns. PCMIN9/21/92 -7- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 William Wilson, 45362 Tesiben Court, Temecula, expressed concern for mass grading with no development, opposed the density and construction on the mountain side. Fred Good, 45906 Hopactong, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), opposed the development due to the quantity of homes presently for sale in the City and the lack of demand for additional homes. Rick Tepalin, 31381 Pahuta Street, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concern for the safety of children along Via Gilberto and Via Eduardo, traffic and wildlife habitat. Bob Oblachinski, 30154 Shaba Circle, .remecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concern for the number of available homes in Temecula and the need for this developer to increase the quantity of homes in the development. Sharon Marshall, 31149 Via Gilberto, .remecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed her concerns that the local economy would not support this project. AI Bobadilla, 31392 Via Eduardo, 'remecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concern for the negative impacts to the mountain (which is part of the Santa Rosa Mountain Range) and wildlife. Michelle Polley, 31234 Eona Circle, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed opposition based on the noise and traffic volumes along Via Gilberto and Pala Road. AI Cook, 30962 Shaba Circle, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), stated that it is his opinion that the placement of a traffic signal at Via Gilberto and Pala Road is not a solution to the problem but admission of a problem. Bobbie Hinker, 31163 Lahontan, Temecula (Wolf Valley HOA), expressed concern with the traffic volumes, noise, crime and pollution. Bernice Sarudi, Hopactong, .remecula (Wolf Valley HOA), opposed the development due to the increase in noise and pollution. Ray Crain, Mission Realty, 337 E. Mission Road, Fallbrook, questioned whether the developer had confirmed secondary access. Kevin Everett, representing the Querry .trust (property south of the proposed project), acknowledged an agreement to a conceptual easement with transfer to Acacia. Larry Markham stated that the developer is fully aware of what is being done with Murrieta Creek and the water shed, however there is no ordinance in the City requiring retention of first water run-off. Mr. Markham added that the project could not carry lower end housing with its conditioned improvements. Commissioner Chiniaeff suggested the following modifications: 1 ) that Lots 1,2, 3 and PCMIN 9/21/92 -8- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1992 1 1 be part of the open space; 2) the developer be required to plant the graded slopes with a substantial planting. Chairman Fahey stated she is concerned that none of the conditions addressed the issue of traffic volumes on Via Gilberto with driveways coming out on this street. Commissioner Blair stated that although the developer has done a excellent job responding to prior concerns, she is still concerned with mass grading, destruction of the hillside and the effect of the change of zone on the residents. Commissioner Hoagland stated he felt the developer has done a very good job of answering the Commission's concerns. It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to close the public hearing at 10:10 P.M. and Recommend Adoption of Negative Declaration for Change of Zone No. 5724 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25277 Amendment No. 4 and Adopt Resolution No. 92-Next} recommending Approval of Change of Zone No. 4 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report; and subject to the attached Condition of Approval and adding conditions that delete Lots 1,2, 3, and 1 I and require the installation irrigation and large trees on the slopes at the time of rough grading. Rick Snyder, representing Acacia Construction, concurred with the additional conditions. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT * Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting Wednesday, September 30, 1992, 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall Main Conference Room * Report on Old Town Advisory Committee meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION None PCMIN9/21/92 -9- 9/23/92 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OTHER BUSINESS None SEPTEMBER 21,1992 ADJOURNMENT Chairman Fahey declared the meeting adjourned to a joint meeting on Wednesday, September 30, 1992, 6:00 P.M., Temecula City Council and Temecula Planning Commission, Temecula City Hall Main Conference Room, 43174 Business Park Dri~/e,/~cula.. /,,~,~.,.~...~ ,~~..~ ~~'~/chair~~a ~ ~F'ahey / secretary PCMIN9/21/92 -10- 9/23/92