HomeMy WebLinkAbout060601 PC MinutesMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 6, 2001
CALL TO ORDER
The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M.,
on Wednesday June 6, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Telesio.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Chiniaeff, Mathewson, Telesio, and
Chairman Guerriero.
Absent: None.
Also Present:
Director of Planning Ubnoske,
Deputy Director of Public Works Parks,
City Attorney Thorson,
Senior Planner Hazen,
.~.ssociate Planner Thornsley,
Project Planner McCoy,
Project Planner Rush, and
Minute Clerk Hansen.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the Agenda of June 6, 2001.
2 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes from April 4, 2001.
2.2 Approve the minutes from April 18, 2001.
MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1-2.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Teles~o and voice vote reflected approval
with the exception of Commissioner Mathewson who abstained from Item No. 2.1.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
3
Planninq Application's for Harveston are P, A00-0419 (GPA), PA99-0418 (SP 13,
Development Code Amendment, and SPIZoninq Standards), PA00-0189 fEIR),
PA99-0245 (Chanqe of Zone), PA99-04461(Development Aqreement), PA00-0295
(Vestina Tentative Tract 29639), PA01-0030 fTentative Tract 29928), PA01-0031
(Tentative Tract 29929) and PA01-0032 fTentative Tract 30088), located east of
interstate 15, north of Santa Gertrudis Cree'k, west of Marqarita Road and south of
the northern City limit. - Patty Anders, A~sociate Planner/Saied Naaseh, Proiect
Planner V/Dave Hoqan, Senior PlannedDebbie Ubnoske, Director of Planninq.
Continued from May 16, 2001.
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Continue the Harveston Specific Plan and all it's associated applications (all
referenced in Subject heading above). A,' verbal recommendation on the
continuance wile be made at the June 6, 2001 meeting.
It was noted that this item was continued to the June 20, 2001 Plannin!~l Commission
meeting.
4 Planninq Application No. 01-0140, (Southwe~ t Traders) - Rick Rush, Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for Plan lng Application No. 01-0140
(Development Plan);
4.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-014
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA A~PPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. 01-0140 A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT AI64,630
SQUARE
FOOT
BUILDING FOR THE PURPOS,E OF EXPANDING THE
EXISTING SOUTHWEST ,TRADERS BUSINESS
LOCATED AT 27565 DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 921 430-004.
P PI R
Via overhead site plans, roject anner ush pr~esented the staff report (of record), noting that
the proposed project would be for the purpose ofI expanding the existing Southwest Traders
business, highlighting the location, the General Pllan designation (Business Park), the zoning
(Light Industrial), the access, the parking, the loading ramps, the architecture and design, the
lack of visibility of the western elevation from the public right-of-way, the minimal visibility of the
R:PlanComm/minulesl060601 ~
eastern elevation, the materials, the landscape plan (which exceeds the requirements), and the
removal of nine eucalyptus trees, and four sycamore trees which were diseased.
For clarification, for Commissioner Chiniaeff, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified
Condition No. 17 (regarding Development Impact Fees), noting that non-profit organizations do
not have to pay Development Impact Fees.
Addressing Commissioner Mathewson's queries regarding the initial study, specifically with
respect to page 10, Item No. 8.h., i., Senior Planner Hazen advised that the 100-year flood issue
has been mitigated primarily via elevating the lower floor elevation above the flood plain.
Mr. Bruce Lindquist, the applicant, noted the desire to delete Condition No. 36.f. (regarding street
lights being installed), relaying that it was his understanding per discussions with staff, that staff
would have no objection to the deletion of this condition.
In response to Mr. Lindquist's comments regarding Condition No. 36.f.(regarding the installation
of street lights), Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that there were limited street
lights along Diaz Road at this time, and that while the City has not required the lights in other
areas, that in the Westside Business Center (a proximate development area) there were street
lights within this Industrial Subdivision; advised that the General Plan requires street lights and
raised landscaped medians on major arterials, as well as sidewalks, which was the rationale for
the inclusion of the condition.
Continuing his comments, Mr. Lindquist noted his concern regarding Condition No. 37 k.
(regarding the installation of a sidewalk and provision of a cash deposit for the half-width raised
landscaped median), relaying that the alternate sites on Diaz Road currently do not have
sidewalks, nor raised medians; and for Commissioner Telesio, advised that this expansion of the
business was for the purpose of addressing a five-year growth plan.
Fudher addressing Condition No. 36 f. (regarding the installation of street lights), Project Planner
Rush noted that subsequent to the applicant relaying his opposition to Condition No. 36. f. that
he contacted Assistant Engineer De La Torre who advised him that this condition could be
waived or removed. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks added that the Public Works
Department could suppod the removal of the requirement to install street lights due to the lack of
consistent lighting on this street, noting, however, that in light of this business doubling in size,
that the area was truck-oriented, and due to the pedestrian traffic on Diaz Road, staff still
supported the inclusion of the condition requiring the applicant to install sidewalks and to provide
funding for the half-width raised landscaped median (referenced in Condition No. 37 k.), advising
that if the Planning Commission opted to delete this condition, that the matter would most likely
be forwarded to the City Council due to the City revenues being ultimately impacted for the costs
of these improvements.
Concurring with staff, Commissioner Mathewson noted the need for sidewalks, and, ergo,
supported maintaining Condition No. 37 k.(regarding the installation of sidewalks and the funding
for the half-width raised landscaped median).
While acknowledging that the need for sidewalks has been determined, and that the City would
have to begin, at some point, to require the installation of such, Commissioner Telesio advised
that neither side of this site will have a connecting sidewalk which will render the sidewalk
useless; and queried whether there could be bonding for the future time when it was determined
that sidewalks would be installed in this area.
R:PlanComm~m;nut esi060601 3
In response to Commissioner Telesio, Deputy Di'ector of Public Works Parks relayed that all
new development on Diaz Road has been required to install sidewalks, advising that
~nterm~ttently the C~ty has oppodun~bes to obtain for grant funding for connecting segments of
s dewa ks; and re terated that the Genera P an da s out for sidewalks on a major arteria s.
/
MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to closle the public hearing; and to approve
staff's recommendation, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval with the exception
of the following:
Delete-
Condition No. 36 f. (regarding the installation of street lights.)
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected
unanimous approval.
5 Plannina Application No, PA01-0025, (Teme. uta Radiator and Auto Repair) - Michael
McCoy, Project Planner II
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Adopt a notice of exemption for Planning Application no. PA01-0025 pursuant to
section 15332 of the California Environrdental Quality Act Guidelines.
5.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled:
PC RESOLUTIC N NO. 2001-015
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA ,~.PPROVING PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. PA01-0025 ,(DEVELOPMENT PLAN),
TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A 21,382 SQUARE
FOOT TWO-STORY AUTO REP,AIR'"'I' SERVICE BUILDING
ON 1.8 ACRES LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
RANCHO WAY WEST OF DIAZ
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 92'1
Via overhead maps and site plans, Project Plato
proposed project (per agenda material), relaying
zoning (Light Industrial), the General Plan desig~
ROAD AND KNOWN AS
040-042.
~r McCoy provided an overview of the
the project site location, the surrounding
~ation (Business Park), the square
footage, the access, the parking, the 28 tempora,ry vehicle storage spaces, the covered
employee lunch area, the trash enclosure area, the decorative paved courtyard, the 22-
foot long oil/coolant storage structure integrated !nto the building design, and the
landscape plan; noted the recent substitution in the landscape plan for eight foot palms to
replace the previous flowering pear trees which staff was not in agreement with, due to
the limited shade the palm trees would provide, ds well as the compatibility with the
building design, advising that Condition No. 12 a! requires that the plan be revised to
either include the pear trees, or a suitable shade canopy tree; noted that Condition No. 12
b. requ res that the andscape berm have a gradba s ope s m lar to the adjacent existing
landscape berm to the west of the project s~te; pr, owded information regarding the eight-
foot perimeter wall proposed at the site which will be visible from the public right-of-way,
and therefore has been conditioned to be a higher quality (Condition No. 11); and
presented the architectural and design plan.
In response to Commissioner Chiniaeff's queries regarding the condition associated with
the fencing, Senior Planner Hazen clarified staff's desire to ensure that the slats in the
fencing were of good quality.
Providing additional information regarding the showroom, for Commissioner Chiniaeff,
Project Planner McCoy relayed that this area would be utilized for the display of
collectible vehicles which would be for display purposes only; with respect to the
landscape plan, noted that while the City's landscape architect was on the opinion that
the palm trees were not the most appropriate trees for this location or consistent with the
particular design plan, that if the applicant planned on maintaining the palm trees in the
landscape plan that the trees be at a minimum of 12 feet in height; relayed that the
applicant's landscape architect, Mr. Vincent Didonato, relayed no opposition to staff's
recommendation to install a softer berm, noting that Mr. Didonato had also worked with
the previous development of the adjacent use which has similar berming.
Commissioner Chiniaeff queried the necessity for conditioning this use to install the berm,
noting that the majority of surrounding uses do not have this berm.
Addressing Commissioner Mathewson's questions regarding the palm trees, Project
Planner McCoy confirmed that the proposal included six date palm trees, specifying the
location, confirming that the application was not proposing to place date palms in the
parking lot area.
Noting that while the agenda material referenced a drum storage area, Chairman
Guerriero relayed that Condition No. 86 solely referred to tank storage. In response,
Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that if the applicant proposed to utilize drum storage,
that language could be added in the Conditions of Approval to address this issue.
Mr. Graham, Euss, the applicant, clarified for staff and the Commission the plan to install
wrought iron gating with mesh screening, and the desire to have two date palm trees in
the entryway solely for accenting purposes.
With respect to the perimeter wall, Mr. Joe Jardine, representing the applicant, noted the
plan to construct a tilt-up wall which would be consistent with the materials utilized on the
alternate portions of the project; clarified that the applicant was agreeable to enhancing
(i.e., sandblasting) the wall along Rancho Way (which was visible from the public right-oF
way), clarifying that the height of the wall was proposed to be six feet, and not eight feet,
as referenced by staff.
Commissioner Chiniaeff noted that the adjacent gas station use does not screen this
property's proposed perimeter wall, relaying that this portion of the wall would also be
visible. In response, the applicant was in agreement with sandblasting this portion, as
well as the Rancho Way segment of wall.
In response to Commission questions, the applicant clarified the following; that the
applicant was willing to increase the size of the two (canary date palm) trees in the
entranceway to a ten-foot trunk (as recommended by the City's landscape architect), that
the showroom would be for the purpose of displaying the kind of work that this particular
R:PlanComm/minu res/060601 5
bus ness performs wh e restoring engines and transm ss ons, that the storage would be
above-ground tanks w~th double containment, arid not drum storage, that the apphcant
was willing to install the palm trees at a height of 112 feet, that while it would be the
applicant's preference to not have the berm whidh was recommended by st;afl, that if it
was the Planning Comrnission's desire for the b~rm to be installed, the applicant would
be willing to include this element.
In response to Commissioner Telesio, the applicant provided additional information
regarding the landscape plan (referencing the colored rendenng ~ncluded ~n the agenda
packets), noting the location of the fern p~ne trees; relayed the lattice covenng above the
employee area which was proposed for prows~on of additional shading; for ,~,omm~ss~oner
Mathewson, clarified that the wrought-iron rolling~ gate would have steel mesh screening
material, and would be a color consistent with th8 wall cover which would most likely be a
desert tan color.
Noting his support of the project, Commissioner ~elesio commended the applicant for his
willingness to enhance the portions of the perimbter wall, which could be viewed from the
public right-of-way.
Concurring with Commissioner Telesio's comme'nts, Commissioner Mathewson
additionally recommended that with respect to tl~e berming that it be transitioned from the
adjacent property.
Applauding the applicant for a job well done, Commissioner Chiniaeff recommended
modifying Condition No. 11 (regarding the ' ~
perimeter wall and the chain-link fence)
specifically in the first line to change the language to specify that the wall enhancements
(i.e., sandblasting) would not be on the wall aro'und the entire project, but on the east
and south portions of the wall, additionally recon~mend~ng deleting the last :sentence of
this condition which references a chain-link fenci~, since the applicant has relayed his
plan to ~nstall wrought-iron gabng w~th metal mesh screening which wdl be consistent w~th
the color of the budding ~n heu of a cha~n-hnk fence; recommended rews~ng the stated
height of the wall which was denoted as eight feet, and should correctly Indicate s¢x feet;
recommended remowng Condition No. 12 a. (regarding the palm trees), and to replace
this condition with a requirement that the accent palm trees be a minimum of twelve feet
in height.
MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to clo~e the public hearing; and lo approve
staff's recommendation with the following added conditions:
Add-
That the berm be transitioned from the adjacent property.
That Condition No. 11 be modified t'o indicate that the perimeter wall along
the east and west sides would be s~ndblasted, deleting the portion of the last
sentence which states view obscuring chain link fence.
That the gating would be wrought ~ron w~th metal mesh screening painted
w~th a color consistent w~th the budding.
That Condition No. 12 a. (regarding the palm trees), be deleted replacing
this condition with a requirement fo~ the two accent palm trees to be a
minimum of 12 feet in height.
That the conditions reflect that the perimeter wall would be 6 feet in height, in
lieu 8 1eet, as indicated.
The motion was seconded by Chairman Guerriero and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
6 Planninq Application No. PA01-0204, (Macy's) - Don Hazen, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Make a Determination of Consistency with a project for which an
Environmental Impact Repod (EIR) was previously cedified and Findings
that a Subsequent EIR is not required; and
6.2 Adopt Resolution No. 2001-016 approving Planning Application No. 01-
0204 (Development Plan - Fast Track) for Macys Department Store,
based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-016
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA01-0204 - (DEVELOPMENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A TWO-STORY, 165,000 SQUARE
FOOT MACY'S DEPARTMENT STORE AS THE FOURTH
ANCHOR TENANT AT THE SOUTH END OF THE PROMENADE
MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
WINCHESTER ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79 NORTH) AND YNEZ
ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910-130-
073.
Planninq Application No. PA01-0248 ( Mall Expansion) - Don Senior Planner
Hazen, Senior Planner
6.3 Make a Determination of Consistency with a project for which an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was previously certified and Findings
that a Subsequent E~R is not required; and
6.4 Adopt Resolution No. 2001-017 approving Planning Application No. 01-
0248 (Development Plan - Fast Track) for the Mall Expansion, based
upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Repod and subject
to the attached Conditions of Approval.
R:PlanComm/rn~n ut es/060601 7
PC RESOLUTION NO. 2001-017
A RESOLUTION OF THE PL~,NNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA APPRO,VlNG PLANNING APPLICATION
NO. PA01-0248 - (DEVELOPM,ENT PLAN - FAST TRACK) TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE .~, TVVO-STORY, 80,000 SQUARE
FOOT EXPANSION OF IN-LINE SHOPS CONNECTING MACYS
TO THE EXISTING MALL PRq'MENADE, AT THE SOUTH END
OF THE PROMENADE MALL, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF WINCHESTER I ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 79
NORTH) AND YNEZ ROAD, ~,ND KNOWN AS ASSE~SSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 910-130-073.
Noting that this item was a request for a mall expansion, Senior Planner H~zen presented
the proposal for an 80,000 square-foot addition fpr two-story shops, and the proposal for a
165 000 square-foot addition for the Macy's project (per agenda material), highlighting the
landscaping plan, noting that the applicant has a,'greed to provide a total of :58 additional
trees throughout the mall site, relaying the condition requiring the applicant to assess the
health of the trees throughout the mall and to re,place the d~seased trees; h~ghhghted the
loading area, and the depressed truck well; withlrespect to the park and ride issue, noted
the 75 park and ride spaces proposed, relaying that the applicant has been conditioned to
provide add~bonal spaces, as necessary; presented the elevabons of the Macy s project,
nobng staff s two ~ssues of concern regarding thf~ architecture, hsted as follows: 1) w~th
respect to the layered approach to the exter or walls, noted that t was staffs op n on that
the wall surfaces do not have adequate rehef 0.~., w~th the proposed 12-tach pop-outs at
each level), recommending that the recessed de,'pth be increased to 18 inches, and 2) that
with respect to the glass elements along the entries, staff was of the opinior~ that this
feature was too narrow in depth, and should be more substanbal; and with respect to the
plans denoting a third stow, clarified that although this element was identified, it has not
been discussed with staff, specifying that it was §taft's recommendation that the Planning
Commission's action not include any reference t~) this third stow plan.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson, Senk
staff reviewed an expansion to the Robinson's
limits, he was unsure as to whether a third stor
in the initial traffic study.
r Planner Hazen relayed that although
ay use which was within the acceptable
on this particular use had been addressed
With respect to the existing diseased eucalyptu= trees which will be remow.~d, for
Commissioner Telesio, Senior Planner Hazen n~)ted that it was his understanding that the
eucalyptus trees would be replaced with an alte~nate~ species; with respect to the recessed
layered elements, relayed staff's desire for there to be a minimum of 18 inches of depth for
each wa which would create a total depth of 36 ~nches from the mare structure,
confirming that that apphcant had relayed that th~s element was solely decorative, and not
for funcbonal purposes; provided an example (ppr photographs) of another facd~ty (which
this building was patterned after) that achieves what staff was seeking w~th respect to the
recessed depth; for Commissioner Mathewson, relayed that staff was recommending that
there be honzontal scoring ~n the area above the doorway; with respect to 'lhe landscaping
plan, noted that with the existing conditions and the advisement of the City's landscape
arch tect, staff was comfortable that adequate I~ndscap ng wou d be ach eyed.
With the proposed architectural design, Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed that the vertical
striping aided in setting the front layer off, advising that in his opinion horizontal striping
(recommended by staff) would conflict with the alternate elements, providing additional
information regarding the proposed layering of the planes which was effective; and opined
that the recommendation for 18-inch recesses, in lieu of the 12-inch recesses was not
necessary. In response, Senior Planner Hazen relayed that staff also relayed a preference
for a texture variation (i.e., on the white panel there could be a smoother surface),
clarifying the goal to create interest, noting that this would be an additional alternative the
Planning Commission could consider.
Mr. James Heller, representing the applicant, via renderings, presented the proposed
landscape plan associated with the Macy's project, specifying the location of the trees
(which would be located in planters away from the building in order to attain the full
growth of the trees), and the berming (which would screen the truck dock); provided an
overview of the architectural design plans (which would provide a prototype design for
additional Macy stores), noting that originally 6-inch recesses were presented, clarifying
the visual appearance of the 12-inch recessed element which provided deeper shadow
lines, noting that it was the intent that the white panel be a smoother texture, and that the
darker toned panels be a rough texture, relaying that the variations in scoring were for the
purpose of providing depth; with respect to the glass entry points, noted that there was a
30-inch depth proposed; provided additional information regarding the photographs of an
alternate Macy's store (i.e., the Lakewood facility) which staff referenced, which included
an atrium space which ultimately was not functional, noting that this current proposal
attempted to create a similar visual appearance, specifying the element on the second
floor at which point there would be outside glass providing a view into the store from the
exterior of the building; for Commissioner Telesio, advised that the corner parapet
elements would be approximately two feet thick; noted the applicant's willingness to
double the thickness of the return elements (which would be 6 feet in height), which
served to screen the mechanical equipment, and to further extend the wall back from the
glass face, noting that this element would have the greatest amount of texturing; for
Commissioner Chiniaeff, relayed that it was not the applicant's desire to continue the
glass element on the returns, noting that there would be steel column beams in this area
which would not be visible with the wall structure; in response to Senior Planner Hazen's
previous comments, relayed that the request for the third stow would be removed from
the proposal; and with respect to staff's recommendation that a horizontal scoring line be
added, clarified the design plan, noting the proposed drop in grade, and the proposed
vedical design elements.
With respect to landscaping, Commissioner Chiniaeff relayed a desire for the trees
proximate to the loading dock to be a larger size (i.e., at a minimum of 24-inch box),
recommending additionally that there be some evergreen trees planted in this area which
would aid in screening the loading area year round. In response, the applicant's
representative relayed agreement to the recommendations.
At this time, Mr. Heller presented the mall expansion proposal, relaying the architectural
character proposed, the screening walls which would be consistent with the existing
screening around the service courts, noting the anticipation of potential outdoor entries
and access points into a larger tenant use; for Commissioner Chiniaeff, specified the
elements that would be located behind the screen wall (i.e., potentially a transformer, a
compactor, and an area for step vans and small trucks to service the smaller tenants); for
Commissioner Mathewson, relayed that the proposed mall entrances would be consistent
R:PlanComm/minutes/O60601 9
with the existing treatments, advising that when :he project was complete, il: would not
have the appearance of an add-on due to the consistency wKh the current treatments; for
Chairman Guerriero, provided add~bonal ~nformabon regarding the circulation, relaying that
Forest C ty was cons der ng adding speed bump's ( e, undulations) in order to nh b t cut-
through traffic, noting the benefits of hawng access around the enbre mall; and relayed the
previous plan for a 50,000 square-foot single us
rink, or a home store use) on the lower level, rel
Noting that overall he was pleased with the proj~
that his primary concerns have been discussed;
a horizontal reveal line to be added, opined that
respect to the recessed depth, relayed that he ~
effect, noting that if this could be attained with a~
;r (which could have been ;an ice skating
lying the revisions to this previous plan.
,ct, Commissioner Mathewson relayed
with respect to staff's recommendation for
Ihis element was not necessary; with
ould desire to have a bold shadowing
18-inch recess, that he w,'~uld support
this recommendation; with respect to landscaping, concurred with Commissioner
Ch n~aeff s comments, recommending the placement of 244rich box trees a,round the
loading area, noting a preference for 24-inch box trees to also be installed around the
Macy's use; with respect to Condition No. 6 (reg~arding the maintenance of landscaping),
recommended that this condition be clear that the determ~nabon would be made by Qty
staff; with respect to Condibon No. 7 a. (regarding the add~bon of a horizontal reveal line),
noted h~s support to delete th~s cond~bon; and op~ned that, overall, this was a wonderful
project. ,
Referencing the photographs of the Lakewood Macy s facility, Commissioner Telesio
noted h~s preference for the concept of the atnum, acknowledging that this area was not
functionally utilized, advising that the exterior a.p, pearance of that particular design was
desirable, noting that the current proposed design solely created an obvious fa~;ade to
make the store appear larger; advised that it wa~s his desire that there be consideration
w th respect to the depth of the g ass fagade, as~we as the corner treatments to prov de a
more substantial appearance; w~th respect to the loading dock, relayed that w~th the
recommendation to add evergreen trees that th~ area would be adequately screened; with
respect to staff's recommendation to add a honzontal reveal line, and to extend the depth
of the recessed elements, noted that he was of !he opinion that these elements were not
necessary, advising that the proposed recessesI provided adequate shadowing effects;
and concurred that the project, overall, would be; a tremendous addition to the mall,
commending the applicant for the good work with respect to the proposed plan.
Providing additional clarification regarding the g!ass treatment, Commissioner Chiniaeff
opined that this design would provide a substantial appearance; concurred with the
previous comments regarding the recommendaiion for increased depth on the layered
elements, noting that 12-tach recesses would be adequate; adwsed that the proposed
design elements would provide effective visual i,~terest; and with respect to the proposed
20 trees to be installed proximate to the wall, re ayed that 24-inch box trees may not be
adequate.
Noting that he had visited the Lakewood facility,~ Chairman Guerriero relayed that he was
not impressed with the design, advising that this,' particular proposed design would
accomplish a pleasing appearance, concurring that adding the horizontal reveal line was
not necessary; advised that th~s project would be an enhancement to the mall; thanked the
applicant for h~s wdhngness to ~nstall the addibopal trees; and relayed that if the traffic
proximate to the Cosco use could be slowed (i.e., with the installation of speed
undulations) that it would be vastly beneficial.
In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries regarding the recessed elements, Mr.
Jason Adams, representing the applicant, relayed that the additional plane elements were
added to create visual interest and would be void space without functional use, noting the
revision to propose 12-inch recessed elements, in lieu of the originally proposed 6-inch;
with respect to the atrium elements on alternate Macy uses, clarified that these elements
were not being utilized, and therefore created a lifeless appearance, noting that this
current proposal would bring a more desirable, lively appearance, relaying the plan to
display product with the proposed glass element which would provide additional interest.
Mr. Heller provided additional detail regarding this proposed design plan which would
create a pleasing visual appearance; and for Commissioner Mathewson, specified that the
recess increases (recommended by staff) would be feasible from a structural standpoint,
but would be extremely costly.
For Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Hazen noted that staff's goal was to create
added visual interest, relaying that with the applicant's revised texturing plan presented at
tonight's meeting, that staff would be satisfied with the smoother surface proposed on the
white panel, and the texture variations proposed by the applicant.
MOTION: Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to close the public hearing; to approve staff's
recommendation regarding Recommendations No. 6.1, and 6.2, with the following
revisions to the attached Conditions of Approval:
Modify-
That Condition No. 7 a. (regarding adding a horizontal reveal line) be deleted.
That Condition No. 17 be modified to reflect a 12-inch depth recessed element.
Add-
A condition requiring a minimum of 24-inch box trees along the area of the
loading dock, that there be evergreen trees included in the palette, and that the
trees located along the main entrances of the buildings be a minimum of 36-inch
box size.
Clarification to Condition No. 6 (regarding landscape maintenance), to specify
that the landscape which was not maintained wouId be required to be replaced
per the discretion of City staff;
and to approve staff's recommendation regarding Recommendation Nos. 6.3, and 6.4. The
motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected unanimous
approval.
COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS
Commissioner Mathewson relayed appreciation to the Cosco applicant, and
to staff for their efforts related to the follow-up regarding the replacement of
the signage.
Chairman Guerriero noted that he would have appreciated the opportunity
to say good-bye to Associate Planner Donahoe who recently resigned from
R:PlanComm/minut es/060601 11
her position on staff; and relayed well w shes to her, noting that she would
be greatly missed.
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the additional June meeting has
been scheduled for June 27th, and tl~at the July meetings have been
scheduled for July 11th, and July 18th du(~ to the 4th of July holiday.
Updating the Planning Commission regarding staffing efforts, Dit'ector of
Planning Ubnoske noted the need to fill three positions; and for Chairman
Guerriero, relayed that Associate Planner Anders would continue on as a
project employee to aid with the Harve~ston Project and other long-range
projects, advising that she would be staying on staff for a period of
approximately two-three months.
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:30 P.M. Chairman Guerriero formally ad, journed this meeting to the next
reclular meetinq to be held on Wednesday, June 20, 2001 at 6:00 P.M., in the
City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula.
Ron Guernero,
Chairman
R:PlanComrr~miau le s/060601 12