Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout121698 PC Minutes . . . MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 16, 1998 ~ c_ , o '" CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, December 16, 199B, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Califomia. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Guerriero., Naggar, Soltysiak, Webster", and Chairwoman Slaven. Absent: None. Also Present: Planning Manager Ubnoske, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Attorney Curley, Senior Planner Fagan, Senior Planner Hogan, Project Planner Donahoe, and Minute Clerk Hansen. .(Having to abstain with regard to Agenda Item Nos. 3 and 4, Commissioner Guerriero left the meeting at 6:49 P.M., and having to abstain with regard to Agenda Item No.4, Commissioner Webster left the meeting at 7:01 P.M.) PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Aaenda MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to approve the agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. 2. Circulation Element Overview Presentation bv Bob Davis, Wilbur Smith Associates Senior Planner Fagan clarified the purpose of the Circulation Element Update, noting that the General Plan was adopted in 1993, with the existing Circulation Element; noted, however, with the rapid growth in the City, staff was directed to update the Circulation Element, specifying that the Circulation Element is part of the General Plan; relayed that staff has identified a circulation alternative based on the current land uses in the City; noted that a Steering . . Committee (comprised of Planning Commissioners, a PubliclTraffic Safety Commissioner, an elected official, members of the City of Murrieta, and staff) which has been meeting since May of 199B, gathering and quantifying existing traffic data, updating the land uses, and refining traffic zones, has reviewed the traffic circulation, as follows: 1) examined the Circulation Element, 2) considered the mall project, and 3) examined the area at mall build-out (projected to be in the year 2006), prioritizing the improvements which will be reviewed by the PubliclTraffic Safety Commission and Planning Commission Workshop January 20, 1999, when the revised Circulation Element will be presented; and, for Chairwoman Slaven, noted that public input (concerning the Circulation Update) will be received at a future point in time when the Circulation Element will be brought to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation, and then, following, at the subsequent City Council Meeting (in approximately March or April). Mr. Bob Davis, representing Wilbur Associates, presented an overview of the Circulation Element Update (per supplemental agenda material), clarifying how pertinent information was obtained, analyzed, and then utilized to update and refine the Circulation Element; noted the elements used ( i.e., the City of Murrieta's Circulation Update, trip generation counts), and the alternatives viewed in arriving at the current refined Traffic Element Update; for Commissioner Webster, clarified that while maintaining Date Street as an overcrossing, the Date Street Interchange was deleted from the Traffic Model, noting that the Traffic Model advances to the range of the year 2007, for improvements; for Commissioner Naggar, relayed that a glossary of terms would be provided to clarify the language of the Traffic Circulation Element, and specified that the mall trip generation rates, which have been refined, were lower in the actual trip rates generated, than had originally been assumed, noting that further data would be presented at the January 20, 1999, Planning Commission Meeting; for Commissioner Soltysiak, noted that the impact of freeway access was also reviewed during the Circulation Update; and clarified, for Chairwoman Slaven, that the widening of Winchester Road will be part of the final prioritization of improvements, relaying that the traffic study for the Reservoir Project has not yet been completed. Senior Planner Hogan clarified, for Commissioner Webster, that the Land Use Element, specifically Exhibits 2.2 and 2.3, were updated one and a half years ago, noting that the updated material will be provided to the Commission, with the current breakdown of the population in the City. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Plannina Application No, PA98-0431 (Tentative Tract Map No. 290331 Request to subdivide 13.6 acres into 72 single family residential lots and one (1) landscaped lot. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Commissioner Guerriero advised that he would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda Item, and, therefore, left the meeting at 6:49 P.M., wishing all a Merry Christmas. 2 . . By way of overheads, Project Planner Donahoe presented the staff report (of record), noting that the proposed project will be below the target number of dwellings, and the density level range originally designated for this area; specified that Lot No. 73, at the north of the proposed project, will remain an open space, and will be maintained by the Master Homeowners Association for Margarita Village; for Commissioner Webster, clarified Condition No. 34, regarding the product review process; and noted that the applicant has requested modification with regard to Item NO.4 of the Fire Department Conditions of Approval (per agenda material), to reflect allowance of a 3B' foot length cul-de-sac turning radius, which is the City standard, in lieu of the indicated 45' feet, relaying that the Fire Marshall concurs with the proposed modification. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks clarified, for Commissioner Naggar, the City's standards with regard to Item NO.4 of the Fire Department Conditions of Approval with respect to the turning radius. Mr. Mick Ratican, representing the applicant, clarified, for Commissioner Webster, the grading elevation of the lots outside the map boundaries, with regard to consistency with the proposed map. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to close the public hearing; moved to make a determination of Consistency with a Project for Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was Previously Certified, and Findings that a subsequent EIR is not required; and to adopt Resolution No. 9B-04B approving Planning Application No. PA9B-0431 based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, as follows: RESOLUTION NO. PC 98-048 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98-0431 (TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29033), LOCATED SOUTH OF LA SERENA, BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND MEADOWS PARKWAY, WITHIN THE TEMEKU HILLS PORTION OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 950- 050-020 M!! modify Condition NO.4 of the Fire Department Conditions of Approval to reflect allowance for a turning radius of 3B' feet, in lieu of the 45' feet indicated The motion was seconded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exceotion of Commissioner Guerriero who abstained. 3 . . 4. Plannina Application No, PA98-0219 (Minor Conditional Use Permitl Request to construct a wireless PCS facility consisting of a twelve (12) panel antenna mounted atop a 65-foot tall monopole constructed to simulate a pine tree ("monopine"), one (1) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna, and six (6) cabinets housing a base transceiver station (BTS) unit and other electronic and battery equipment. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Planning Department that the Planning Commission approve the request. Commissioner Webster advised that he would be abstaining with regard to this Agenda Item, and, therefore, left the meeting at 7:01 P.M., per Attorney Curley's counsel. By way of renderings, Project Planner Donahoe presented the staff report (of record), noting that the site currently maintains two existing above-ground water tanks, as well as, a Pacific Bell 50-foot high monopole; relayed that when the application was submitted in May of 199B, although there was opposition from the Chardonnay Hills Homeowners Association, the applicant met with the representative for Chardonnay Hills, and staff, to discuss the project; noted that the applicant did research alternative locations for the PCS facility and analyzed the monopole height which resulted in the proposed project presented at this site with a lowered height at 60', disguised as a pine tree, with the addition of three additional Italian Pine trees for visual aesthetic purposes; relayed that at the November, 1998, Director's Hearing, five homeowners, from the adjacent housing tract, spoke in opposition of the project, noting their primary concern was the EMF (electromagnetic field) emissions, and requested that the matter be continued to a hearing at a more convenient time. Ms. Donahoe advised that this project, with regard to the EMF (electromagnetic fields) is well below the exposure standards that the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) has set; for Commissioner Naggar, specified the exact proposed location of the monopine; for Chairwoman Slaven, identified the location of the proposed chain-linked fence, adjacent to the existing RCWD (Rancho California Water District) chain-linked fence with existing barbed wire, noting that a line-of-sight test was done revealing that the proposed chain-linked fence will not be visible form the homes on Merlot Crest; and advised that the City's Landscape Architect is recommending that a condition be added requiring three additional 36-inch box pine trees to be installed. Mr. John Murphy, representing the applicant, clarified that the applicant has met all the standards setforth by the City, and noted that staff has rnade a Finding indicating that the proposed project is not detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Mr. Greg Morrision, representing the applicant, presented a display sample of the mono pine branch, noting the specifications of the construction of the monopine tree; for Chairwoman Slaven, relayed that although the tree lasts from eight to ten years, the project could be conditioned to have the applicant periodically refurbish the monopine for maintenance; and noted that the applicant would be agreeable to conditioning the project to adding additional branches to the monopole. 4 . . Dr. Jerrold T. Bushberg, Clinical Associate Professor of Radiology at UC Davis, representing the applicant, presented the EMF emission exposure standards of safety, set by the FCC, noting that they are 50 times lower than the minimal level thought to be dangerous, at exposure rates of 24 hours a day, 365 days a year; noting that this particular project is approximately 50,000 times less than the level thought to be potentially hazardous; specified that the broadcast energy levels, specifically aimed toward the horizon, release a small amount of energy level at ground level; relayed the EMF standards world-wide; for informational purposes, clarified that the levels of emissions from a baby monitor would be ten times greater than the emissions of exposure at the proposed site. Dr. Bushberg advised, for Chairwoman Slaven, that this particular type of exposure has been in existence for over four decades, and that although the cumulative effects of multiple antennas would be additive, the emissions would still be below the safety standard; for Commissioner Naggar, clarified that EMF emissions can cause harm, like any agent (I.e., water) and would depend upon the dosage: specified that the safety standard set represents a general consensus of scientific opinion, noting that relative to the height and level of emissions, an adjacent neighbor could be on his roof 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and be safe from harm; advised that if the system malfunctioned, the broadcast levels would lessen; and noted that the levels of emissions from cellular phones are hundreds of times higher than the emissions from the proposed project. The following individuals spoke in opposition to the proposed project: Mr. Larry LeDoux Mr. Shawn Sierle Mr. Frank DiGiacomo Mr. Merle Campbell Mr. Leo Finegold 32004 Merlot Crest 32016 Merlot Crest 32032 Mertot Crest 32027 Merlot Crest 32036 Merlot Crest A petition was submitted in opposition of the project with 2B signatures, encompassing 17 of the 20 adjacent residences. The above-mentioned individuals spoke in opposition to the proposed project, recommending to the Commission denial or postponement of the issue, for the following reasons: documentation and data presented warning against prolonged exposure to EMF, noting that the information on the subject is inconclusive concern with regard to the long-term effects of EMF on unborn babies .' the location of the proposed site, recommended siting away from residential areas concern with more antennas at a future point in time being installed concerned with government standards, determining a matter is safe, and then at a later point in time, issuing a warning of hazard on the same matter requested documentation from the American Cancer or Heart Association on EMF 5 . . Dr. Bushberg addressed the concerns and questions of the community and the Commission, as follows: clarified that the documentation provided by Mr. Bierle almost conclusively focused on powerline electric and magnetic fields, not radiowave emissions from telecommunication facilities (the issue at hand), noting that the electromagnetic field emissions from telecomrnunication radiowaves are non- ionizing, versus the aforementioned, which are ionizing for Chairwoman Slaven, clarified that radiowaves could be divided into ionizing and non-ionizing radiowaves, noting that non-ionizing radiowaves at the threshold levels maintained below a certain level are non-carcinogenic, echoed by a consensus of national and international scientific data, yielding safety at this particular project, with exposure at these levels, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year noted that the scientific body chartered by Congress, and other scientific data, have detailed the effects of EMF, advising that there is pertinent conclusive information on EMF with regard to the effect on pace-makers, advised that there are no negative effects from telecommunication towers due to the low levels emitted presented, by way of overheads, documentation from the American Cancer Society, noting that non-ionizing radiation at such low levels is not a carcinogen For Chairwoman Slaven, Mr. Murphy noted that the applicant executed three search ranges, considering alternative sites, noting that the criteria for siting a location is based on a location concentrated on a main transportation corridor, utilizing publiC utilities sites. Initially, the Commission expressed their comments on the proposed project, as follows: Commissioner Naggar relayed that since he was not completely knowledgeable on the technical aspects of the hazards associated with the EMF emissions, and since the data appeared inconclusive, he would vote in favor of the residents' concerns, opposing the project. In contrast, Commissioner Soltysiak, noted that since the residents located their residences, with full disclosure, adjacent to an existing similar facility, and since the area is zoned for such facilities, he would accept the staff recommendation and vote in favor of the project. Chairwoman Slaven noted her concurrence with Commissioner Naggar's comments, further commenting that the quality of life included living without fear, and since the residents have expressed grave concerns with the EMF emissions, she could not support the project, suggesting that the applicant site another location, away from residential areas. Attorney Curley clarified that since the Federal Communication Act of 1996, expressly considered the environmental effects that it is not in our jurisdiction to base the criteria of the land use findings on the EMF emissions, due to the aforementioned preemption, noting that 6 . . the Public Utilities Commission could override a decision, if based upon the stated criteria; advised that this determination has been made due to the technical nature of the informational data. Commissioner Naggar requested prOVIsion of information on case law involving cellular facilities and the regulation that specify or limit the Commission's action. Planning Manager Ubnoske relayed that the adjacent neighbors could have investigated and determined that their property is located adjacent to a public utility site, noting that the existing Pacific Bell monopole was at the site, prior to the residents locating there. Project Planner Donahoe advised that although the data was not currently available, the applicant did explore other sites, as stated in the staff presentation. Chairwoman Slaven suggested continuing the matter to obtain information supporting the location site and, whether, or not, there is another location which would provide equivalent service. Based on community input, Mr. Murphy, representing the applicant, was agreeable to obtaining the data and research for location siting and investigating any identifiable alternative sites. MOTION: Commissioner Naggar moved to close the public hearing; and moved to continue the matter to the January 6, 1999, Planning Commission meeting, for the aforementioned reasons. The motion was seconded by Chairwoman Slaven and voice vote reflected unanimous approval with the exception of Commissioners Guerriero and Webster who abstained. PLANNING MANAGER'S REPORT A. With regard to Dr. John Husing's Economic Development Strategy report, it was noted that if the Commission had questions, Assistant City Manager O'Grady could address those issues at a Planning Commission meeting. B. With regard to the parking of trucks along Diaz Road, it was noted that Code Enforcement has referred the matter to the Police Department. COMMISSIONER REPORTS No comments. 7 .; .' .. . . ADJOURNMENT At 9:02 P.M. Chairwoman Slaven formally adjourned this meeting to Wednesdav. Januarv 6. 1999, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. . 1 J)~'6~0-e-- Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Manager 8