Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-16-2007 NAHMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAIC ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, JANUARY 1G, 2007 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman O'Neal called the Regular Planning Commission Meeting to order at 6:07 pm. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Flores led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: O'NEAL, GONZALES, FLORES, MENDOZA, ZANELLI ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Also present were: Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz, Planning Manager Weiner, Deputy City Attorney Santana, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Associate Planner Carlson, Project Planner Coury, Planning Consultant Miller, and Office Specialist Herrington. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Non-Agenda Items CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes Regular Planning Comtission Meeting Minutes fox July 18, 2006. MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY ZANELLI AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO APPROVE MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 18, 2006. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 2 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 16, 2007 2. Minor Design Review of aSingle-Family Residence located at 412 Langstaff Street (APN: 374-061-005) Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz provided a brief overview of the proposed project and requested more time to review the project and additional time fox staff preparation. Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project to February 6, 2007 MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO CONTINUE A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF ASINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LCATED AT 412 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN 374-061-005) TO FEBRUARY 6, 2007. 3. Minor Design Review of aSingle-Family Residence located at 414 Langstaff Street (APN: 374-061-005) Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz provided a brief overview of the proposed project and requested more time to review the project and additional time fox staff preparation. Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project to February 6, 2007. MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY GONZALES AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO CONTINUE A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 414 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN: 374-061-005) TO FEBRUARY 6, 2007. 4. Minor Design Review of aSingle-Family Residence located at 416 Langstaff Street (APN: 374-061-0051 Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz provided a brief overview of the proposed project and requested more time to review the project and additional time fox staff preparation. Staff is requesting a continuance of the proposed project to February 6, 2007. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 3 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0, TO CONTINUE A MINOR DESIGN REVIEW OF ASINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 416 LANGSTAFF STREET (APN: 374-061-005) TO FEBRUARY 6, 2007. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 5. Canyon Hills Estates: Environmental Impact Report No 2006-02, General Plan Amendment No 2006-04, Specific Plan No 2006-O1 and Tentative Tract Map No. 34249. Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz provided an overview of the project and requested Associate Planner Coury to review it with the Commission and answer questions. Associate Planner Court' provided an overview of the project. Minutes taken verbatim Coury Thank you Rolfe, Mx. Chairman, members of the Commission. The proposed project, Tom next slide, the proposed project identified as Canyon Hills Estates is located in the Canyon Hills area, the Canyon Hills Specific Plan development is located here, Lost Road is over off to the side, Pine Avenue located here, Cottonwood Canyon Road goes through, divides the site at this point. Excuse me, as the Plamung Commission is aware the item was continued from the December 19a' Planning Commission meeting to this evening of January 16`". The continuance was requested fox the environmental noticing period to close on December 27~'. It should be noted that since the Plam~uig Commission is the recommending body and not the approving body the project could have been, could have proceeded forward as originally scheduled without any violation ox compromise of the California Environmental Quality Act. However, due to the nature of the comments that staff was receiving it was, staff felt that it was prudent to continue the item until after the environmental noticing period had closed hence the meeting this evening. At the close of the environmental noticing periods, Agenda Item No. _ Page of PAGE 4 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 staff received 15 comment letters regarding the project and which is identified as Exhibit F of your staff report and staff has commented and responded to those comment letters identified as Exhibit G. In October of 2005 the property owners of the project site filed an application with the City requesting that their property be annexed into the City of Lake Elsinore. On April 11~' of 2006 the Ciry Council approved the annexation project and commenced the annexation proceedings fox the project site. After the City Council adopted the Resolution commencing the annexation proceedings staff submitted an application to LAFCO fox an amendment to the City's Sphere of Influence boundary to include this project site. On October 26s' of 2006 LAFCO approved the boundary change by way of LAFCO Resolution 2006-105-1 and 3 an amendment to the Sphere of Influence of the City of Lake Elsinore addition and the removal from the W$domax unincorporated community. The project proposed before you this evening includes a General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map and identified as the previously identified Draft EIR. The General Plan Amendment will change the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan designation from very low density and mountainous to low density residential. The Specific Plan, the purpose of the Canyon Hills Estate Specific Plan is to provide an orderly and efficient development of the project site. Canyon Hills Estates will be a planned residential community containing a maximum of 302 dwelling units with a public park open space, I'm sorry, with a public park and open space integrated into the project design. Canyon Hills Estates is designed to conform to the topography of the site and appear as an extension of the existing Canyon Hills development immediately to the north. The Canyon Hills Estate Specific Plan divides the project into three basic land categories: residential; public park and open space. The residential category has two subcategories of single family residential SFl and single family residential SF2. Design Guidelines axe contained in Chapter 5 of the Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 5 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Specific Plan identifying the development standards for those areas. The single family residential 1 consists of lot size ranging from a minimum of 7,200 sf to over 20,000 s£ 'The single family residential 2 identifies lot sizes with a minimum size of 3,000 sf and propose a 64 dwelling, I'm sorry 64 residential lots. The public park designation has been assigned to a 5.4 acre site which again is located in this location with Cottonwood Canyon Road going through here. The open space is towards the center of the project in this locarion which is also the most mountainous of the area if that is what you designate it as. The Specific Plan again has been designed to take into consideration that hillside area and once development occurs the grading will take into consideration the hillside area as well. The design of the subdivision results in a density of 1.23 dwelling units per acre which is consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designations of low density residential. The proposed lots within the tract map identifies 302 single family detached residential lots within the Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. Twelve lettered lots fox open space, two lettered lots fox water tank sites and one letter lot fox public park. It should be noted that with relation to the water tank sites, the water tank sites axe designated at a specific site location as a requirement of the appropriate water district to allow fox usable water pressure and proper fire safety water flows. Any attempt to deviate from the appointed locarion could disrupt the designated water flow requirements and impact such agency standards. Please note that condirion number 4 of the project of the Condirions of Approval requires that the applicant provide landscaping for the screening of the onsite water tanks to help mitigate the aesthetic appearance of the identified tanks. The Canyon Hills Specific Plan is consistent with the City's General Plan and preexisting development adjacent to the project site. Again referring to the Canyon Hills development located to the north. The low density residential designation in combined with the Specific Plan zoning provide an opportunity to cluster Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 6 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 development and create a significant open space area that other General Plan designations would not facilitate. By functioning as a regulatory document the Canyon Hills Estate Specific Plan provides a means of implementing the City's General Plan through implementation of particularized land use provisions, development regulations, and design guidelines. The environmental determination again has been noted through the Draft Environmental Impact Report that impact, that Draft Environmental Impact Report concluded that unavoidable adverse impacts relating to air quality on a short term impact during construction and traffic with relation to cumulative impacts post the 2025 that would occur in the future buildout of this area with ox without the project would result with the proposed applications a statement of overriding considerations has been prepared in accordance with Section 15093 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines which balances the proposed project against this unavoidable environmental effect. It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the appropriate resolutions fox the proposed project. As the Commission, I handed out before the meeting this evening would be aware there's been a note to the change of a mitigation measure at the request of Pechanga. That email was received this afternoon and again has been handed before the Commission. The applicant has reviewed the proposed mitigation measure modification and is acceptance, accepting to it, with that that mitigation measure will be modified fox the City Counc$ packet as it goes forward next week. With that the applicant is in the audience this evening. Staff would entertain any questions the Planning Commission may have and that concludes my presentation. O'Neal Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 7 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Thank you Mx. Court'. I have a number of requests to speak on this item. If you wouldn't mind taking the podium when I call your name. You have three minutes. Please state your name and address fox the record. I'd like to start off with Vicki Mata. Mata Good evening Mx. Chairman and Commissioners. I have a brief presentation, I'll do it quickly. My address is, I'm at Trtunaxk Companies, and my address is 9911 Irvine Centex Drive in Irvine, California. I want to thank City staff fox their time and effort to fairly and thoroughly and professionally analyze the proposed Canyon Hills Estates Specific Plan. You have a lot of information in front of you that provides extensive detail about the proposed Canyon Hills Estates community and you heard a brief overview from the project from Kirt. However, before we discuss the community in more detail I would like to give you some background on why we decided to do business in the City of Lake Elsinore and how we selected the Canyon Hills Estates site and led to the site plan before you fox consideration. Despite the beauty of the area for many years Lake Elsinore was overlooked but it is now in the limelight reflecting the environment it is located in with the mountains to the west, the lake and the rolling hills to the east and its prime location to close proximity to major metropolitan areas. Even more importantly Lake Elsinore is a budding city of its own with major regional retail centers opening this past year and new office complexes to bring high paying jobs to the area. With the growing employment sector and the wealth that is coming to the community new high end housing opportunities need to also follow suit. Trumaxk Companies experience in creating high quality communities and our strong desire to do business in the community made it a perfect match. The only thing missing was a site. Therefore we actively searched fox ideal properties in Lake Elsinore close to services that would allow us to meet our goal. Given Lake Elsinoxe's ideal setting, we did not have to Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 8 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 search long. The Canyon Hills site met and exceeded all the criteria fox the property and settings to create a luxury master planned community providing homes fox a variety of economic means and lifestyles. Although by no means an easy effort to arrive at the detailed site plan design you see before you this evening. The basic layout of the site plan was a natural fit fox the site. Extreme care was taken, taken to design a site plan that complimented surrounding residential neighborhoods while at the same time preserving sensitive envixontnental resources and limiting development impacts in hillside areas to the extent feasible. Trumaxk utilize an integrated multidisciplinary environment based planning methodology involving environmental resource specialist, land planners, traffic engineers, landscape architects, civil engineers, visual resource specialists, water resource specialists, economists and real estate market analyst to arrive at the context sensitive Canyon Hills Estate Specific Plan and site plan you'll be considering. O'Neal Ms. Mata, you're going to have to wrap this up. Mata Alright, let's see here. I'll just do the conclusion then. O'Neal Thank you. Mata If I could fmd it. In conclusion, the proposed Canyon Hills Estates community represents a context sensitive development design that the property owners have been involved with from the beginning and axe in support of as it achieves their dream fox contributing the property they have owned fox decades to create a quality community that is responsive to the Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 9 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 sites environment and surrounding uses as well as the lifestyles objectives and will provide multiple benefits to the City of Lake Elsinore and its residents. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. Next speaker is Linda Metivier, I apologize if I'm murdering your last name. Metivier (speaking from the audience) O'Neal I beg your pardon? Yeah I know you axe. Sure. You still only get three minutes. Paul Metivier Chairman O'Neal before my time starts, may I bring up an issue to each and everyone of you please, five neighbors of Navajo Springs and Crooked Axxow Road and not a single one of us was notified of this meeting tonight. That's what the hold up was about. Has that been clarified six? Coury Not yet, we're looking through it. Paul That's what the hold up was about. The people who axe most intimately affected by this project aren't even being told about these meetings six. Is there anything we might be able to do about it? May I ask fox this to be postponed please? We've not been notified. You axe in violation of the law and Brown Act, we have not been notified. We all live within 300 feet of this project. Deputy City Attorney Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 10 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 The Brown Act simply requires that notice be given by posting the agenda 72 hours prior to the meeting in a public place that is accessible to everyone and the agenda was posted on Friday, Kixt? Coury Correct. Deputy City Attorney Friday afternoon in front of City Hall in the glass case. Paul I don't live in Elsinore ma'am. Deputy City Attorney That's all that the Brown Act requires. That is the minimum and to the extent that the City decided to send out notices to other residents in excess of that notification that radius is typically 300 feet from the project site where people receive that notice. But that is not something that is required, that is something... Paul My project backs up 30 feet from the project site. We all live on Navajo Springs and Crooked Axxow which axe the proposed accesses so that would certainly bring us within that sphere of influence... Deputy City Attorney Yes it certainly would. It certainly would that is why Mx. Couxy is checking out the mailing labels to verify whether ox not you were notified. However, the Brown Act does require at a minimum only that we post the agenda 72 hours beforehand and the City did comply with that requirement. O'Neal Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 11 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Excuse me. Paul And you guys can live with this? O'Neal Excuse me, you have three minutes to speak whatever you want to do. Paul As you proceed tonight I am hoping you axe in receipt of this letter dated December 21, 2006 from the County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management. It was sent to I believe a Wendy Worthy Principal Environmental Planner for the City of Lake Elsinore and it speaks to the Transportation Department's high concern about the developing traffic related to this project including Lost Road and Cotton Canyon. It speaks to all of these roads being used as shortcuts as a result of this but this is what it proposes. That Navajo Springs and Lost Road north of Navajo Springs be paved to the County standards. That the City of Lake Elsinore, I'm assuming, participate financially in the funding mechanism for the paving of Lost Road southerly to Lemon. Chew on that one guys. Southerly to Lemon. The County is considering establishing a funding mechanism fox development in the County to participate which should also include a substantial contribution from the project that would be directly access Lost Road and is anticipated to use substantially in the future. Participate finance, Lake Elsinore's participate financially in the funding mechanism to improve Cottonwood Canyon south to Bundy. The Transportation Department would be pleased to work with the City to jointly develop a funding mechanism fox improving Cottonwood Canyon Road. The traffic study identifies that project traffic will use Holland Road to the east and references that the Pardee Homes project is responsible fox paving of Holland. It also states that the roads will be paved to up to County standards. The project Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 12 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 should be conditioned to provide the paving in the events that the Pardee project does not move forward if this paving has not akeady been done and the paving should extend east to meet the existing paved section beyond the City limits. The fifth point is incredible because it says it is, if it is found that this is not feasible to improve either Lost Road to Lemon or Cottonwood Canyon alternate forms of access for the project should be explored. The County of Riverside is saying that the traffic impacts on this project axe pretty huge and I'm hoping that this is not the fast time this has been brought to you. I would certainly think that it would have been shared infra department but at the least I would have expected Truxnaxk to bring it to your attention because it's huge. The residents continue to legally explore and fund a lawsuit in regards to this. We axe pursuing further litigation as it relates to Navajo Springs being a private road fox 42 years. There axe lots of things. We stood here nine months ago and said this is not a pure project. And we would certainly hope that you would give us some considerations and the County some considerations as it goes to City Council and then to LAFCO. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. Our next speaker is John Flannigan. Flannigan Commissioner O'Neal, fellow chair committee members, staff. I'm a property owner. I'm one of the property owners. There's two, I represent the 80 acres that will have the park on it and the upper right hand segment of that map that you looked at earlier. I've owned this property for over 30 years. When I purchased the property I could stand at my front door and not see a light in any direction, nowhere around. I frequently visited with Mxs. Christenson who has past away now and that property represents most of what is known as the Pardee Development. I have a development now right up to my fence line. My point Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 13 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 here today is that it's no longer the property I purchased 30 years ago. Many, many people moved in. I owned my property 30 years and you'll be hearing from the Baxxon's family they own their property fox over 50 years. It's just amazing to me when we moved there it was a beautiful place to see and time moved on and like I said I now have homes right on the fence but more than that what I really have is about 16 motorcycle people I have to run off every weekend because they think what I have 80 acres and maybe the adjoining property is just xecxearional land. Someone told me one day well don't get so huffy with me it's all BLM land isn't it? It's pretty hard they cut the fence, they cut the wire where the Pardee gate once was. It's been knocked down a number of times. I do a lot of repairs over there but my point is this, time moved on and the property area around the property changed and I learned to change with it. I applaud the City of Lake Elsinore and your democratic process of hearing the pros and cons of this development but I ask you to consider we're not just flipping a piece of property, a property in gain. What we purchased is no longer there. The love we had fox that land is gone and I ask you to consider our part as you move forward on this decision. Thank you very much fox the privilege to speak. O'Neal Thank you six. The next speaker is Rick Estes. Estes Honorable Planning Commission I had... O'Neal Do you mind stating your name? O'Neal Rick Estes and I live in Wfldomax on Robert Street, 33160 Robert Street in Wlldomax. I had just a couple of questions and they're fox my own clarification. I understood from Kixt's Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 14 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 presentation that everybody, all of the Planning Commissioners got the 15 comments of that, apparently there were 15 answers to the Draft EIR that was sent out so it was my understanding that your packet included those and that you had had a chance to review and see those comments and I, Mx. Metivier talking, was referring to the County of Riverside's concern but apparently there were 14 other ones and I haven't seen those. What I saw was the one answer that you gave to the consultant doing the Draft EIR he gave Cheryl Ade an answer so the only thing anyone of us would have seen up to this point I believe is just the one particular answer that they had given. But I'm assuming that you all have all 15 answers and that you've had a chance to take a look at them and then my second question would be of the 15 comments that you received from the Draft EIR other than apparently there was a change made today from a request by Pechanga, were there any other changes made to the Draft EIR? I guess what I'm saying is what you have in front of you today is that the same document that was circulated to the public ox have there been changes incorporated from the comments and then finally of course if you've had a chance to review what you received. So that's my purpose in trying to get some clarification on the process that I'm reviewing from out in the audience and that's it. That's my comments. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. Steve Uraine. Uraine Good evening, yes I'm Steve Uraine 32255 Navajo Springs Road in Wildomax. And no we didn't receive a notice on this and you know my limited understanding is you need to do that so if that's the case then these proceedings I suspect would be out of order and I think somebody needs to say it so it's done. With that said I'll move on. The development it proposes to use Navajo Springs Road as part of its access. I live off of Navajo Springs Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 15 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Road, it's a private road. Talking with Juan Perez, Deputy Director of Riverside County Transportation Department, Maxk Vernes, same Department they have concurred that the road is indeed a private road and we do not give our consent to use it. Additionally, our attorneys seem to agree that it's a private road so everybody concurs that it's a private road and we do not give our consent to using it. You will probably go ahead this evening and vote on this project and approve it. We, actually I expect you to do so and you should probably expect us to act accordingly. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. At this point I would like to ask Mx. Coury to address a couple of these issues. The traffic concerns at Lost Road, Navajo Road, the issue of private versus public. The 15 answers and comments if you mind doing that if we had in fact had a chance to review this. Coury Sure. Mx. Chairman if I could I was taking some notes, I'll go in order and then with relation to Navajo Springs I'd like to defer to the City Engineer on that as well. O'Neal Thank you. Coury Mx. Medviex indicated that he was not noticed. We do have the mailing labels and the radius map. It identifies Mr. Paul and Linda Metiviex, assessor parcel nutnbex 365-220-022 at 32200 Crooked Arrow Drive in Wildomax. So they were included on the mailing radius. Paul Metivier (shouting from the audience) Six, I was not notified. You're calling me a liar. I was not notified I didn't get anything in the mail. When they say they're mailed but I'm here telling you... Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 16 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 O'Neal Excuse me six. Paul Metiviex I was not notified. O'Neal Excuse me six. Paul Metiviex Thank you. O'Neal You're out of order. Thank you. Paul Metiviex So was he six. O'Neal Well actually he's not. I called on him to respond, he is responding. Thank you. Couxy There was also mention as far as the County Transportation letter as the Commission is aware there were 15 comment letters as indicated included as Exhibit F with the Planning Commission staff xepoxt packet so you have those before you. That was I believe mailed to the Planning Commissioner's on ox delivered, I'm sorry, on Friday. So you did receive them before the audience. The Commission was in receipt of the packet prior to tonight's meeting. With Mx. Este's comment, it's similar to that that the comment letters the Planning Commission did receive as part of the packet as indicated in the staff xepoxt. Exhibit G is the comment letter and Exhibit F is the response to those comments. I haven't had the chance ox opportunity, I was taking notes so I cannot identify if Mx. Uxaine was included on Agenda I[em No. Page of PAGE 17 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 the mailing labels. I can research that and further into the meeting I can confirm that fox the Commission. And at this point with relation to Navajo Springs as a private road I will defer that to the City Engineer. O'Neal Thank you Mx. Seumalo. Seumalo Yes six, thank you. The engineering staff and the traffic engineer with our retired traffic engineer took into account the traffic study that was presented by the project and the concerns presented tonight during public comment were addressed in, were taken into consideration in our analysis. There is a trip distribution onto Navajo Springs and Cottonwood Canyon Road as well as Holland Road. But the Conditions as stated in the staff report address those issues. The letter presented by the County staff received and reviewed it. I spoke with our current traffic engineer this evening prior to coming here and we have a couple of questions regarding their analysis. I work with Mx. Perez and I believe him to be a competent engineer. However, there isn't any substantiation to their opinion about the distribution of trips where the project presented a traffic engineer, a traffic study which we analyzed with both our traffic engineer consultant as well as our current engineer and we believe that the Conditions as written address the concerns. O'Neal Thank you Mr. Seumalo. Seumalo Yes six. O'Neal Rolfe, would you have something you'd like to add about this? Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 18 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Pxeisendanz No, I just wanted to say that we've complied with noticing requirements and as far as the mailing we mail them out, whether you had received them, we do the mailing, we try to notify according to law, we go over and above what our requirements axe so I think we've gone over and above what we axe required to do so as fax as you getting it actually in hand, I don't know. Paul Metivier We received City CouncIl notice. Did you send out the wrong one? Preisendanz No. And I want to thank I{ixt fox all of his work and endurance. There's a long history with this project. We've gone through quite a bit of ordeal. In fact we've continued this project from the first Planning Commission to allow it to go through the review process. Originally it was going to be scheduled fox an earlier Planning Commission meeting and we've made every attempt to try to do this project correctly and I feel confident that we have so that's all I have to say on this project. O'Neal Thank you Rolfe. Couxy Mx. Chairman, sorry to interrupt I just wanted to confirm that we also identify on the same packet of mailing labels Steve and Kathy Uxaine, 32255 Navajo Springs Road. So again they were included on the mailing labels which were distributed and also fox clarification fox the audience. Not only were mailing labels distributed as Rolfe indicated and as Alisha, City Attorney have indicated, the City Hall posting was posted on Friday out at the project site. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 19 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 There is a project board which identifies the project and a notice placed on that as well. So three measures were taken to make sure and ensure that people were notified of the project. O'Neal Thank you Mx. Couty. As this is a public hearing anyone who did not fill out a request to speak that wants to speak in favor of this project may do so at this time. Seeing none, anyone who did not fill out a request to speak who wishes to speak not in favor of this project you may do at this time. Excuse me, I believe that you let your time go by to your husband. Is that not correct? Go ahead. Linda Metivier Thank you. My name is Linda Metivier. I live at 32200 Crooked Axxow Drive in the County of Riverside, WIldomax. It's interesting that everybody in Lake Elsinore was notified of the meeting as they axe the ones that axe "impacted" by the project. As my husband stated our property is just in front of the Cottonwood Hills Specific Plan that you've seen tonight. We definitely are impacted by the project. We axe in the process like he said of a lawsuit. We do consider that Navajo Springs to be a private road and we axe not understanding how a developer can come in and take over a private road and do what they want with it with your permission. Another thing that I don't know if you have before you that hasn't been addressed ox fox me, is the water supply. We axe on wells out there. There's a thing in the paper not too long ago about another community that was impacted by a development where they lost their water and I'd like to know how that's been addressed and what you have to come to conclusion on that. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak against this project that did not fill out a form? Anyone that would like to speak about this project about anything at all about Agenda Item No. _ Page of PAGE 20 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 this project? Seeing none I'll close the public hearing at 6:40. Bring it up here fox Commissioner comments. I'll start down at the other end with Commissioner Axel Zanelli. Zanelli In regard to the 15 letters, 13 of those were from agencies such as the State of California, the Gas Company, Department of Toxic Substances Control, the Water District, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, Fish and Game, Riverside Transportation, Pechanga Indian Reservation, Southern California Association of Governments, Riverside County Flood Control, the School District and the Governor's office of Plannuig and Research. The only two not from State agencies were from WIN and I believe one other from an individual but can find it. Anyway, there was a response to all the concerns in those letters. We had a chance to go through and I feel most of them were answered. The only question I have now is from the City Attorney in regard to the private road issue. I don't know if you'll be able to answer that tonight or have to do some research into that. Deputy City Attorney Yes definitely, there have been some negotiations ongoing as between the City of Lake Elsinore and the Wildomax residents fox responsible growth. The unincorporated community that sued the City on the basis of the annexation of this property into the City of Lake Elsinore and as part of those settlement negotiations there has been some discussions with regards to the roadways however because settlement negotiations axe ongoing and the terms of the settlement have not yet been solidified we can't really say much more than that. But the roads are being addressed. Navajo Springs Road in particular and we hope to have some resolution of that here in about the next month or so and I'd be happy to report back to you to inform you of the outcome of that, those settlement negotiations when I am apprised of the details. Agenda Item No Page of PAGE 21 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Zanelli Thank you and the only other issue was brought up regarding the wells and I don't know fox a fact but I'm guessing that the development will have all the EVMWD water and sewer provided and shouldn't really have an impact on the wells in that area. If anyone on staff can respond to that? Coury I would agree actually Commissioner Zanelli if you'd like I could defer to the applicant with their team of experts here that could explain in detail. Zanelli I think if they could step up and address that that would be appreciated by the residents. Coury If you would like as well to add onto what Ms. Santana was identifying with regards to the road they would be happy to address that fox you as well. Zanelli That would also be nice. Taber Good everting Commissioners, my name is Alene Taber. I'm with the law firm of Jackson DeMareo Tidus and Peckenpaugh here today representing Trumark. I just wanted to very briefly address your question about the road. I think there's potentially a misunderstanding. There's a difference between a county road and a public road. This road is in the situation where it is pending dedication to become formally a county road and be maintained by the County. However, even before the dedication is accepted a road can become what is called a public road and that occurs through public use. Many of you know that this is a road that was part of a tract map I think it's something like 40 ox some years old. It's had a very long Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 22 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 history of public use and there is a lot of case law that basically states that if you have public use on a road it becomes a public road but that doesn't necessarily mean it becomes a part of the County system yet and I hope that answers your question. Be happy to provide you with any additional information. Zanelli That's fine on that and you could respond to the water issue. O'Neal Thank you Ms. Taber. Knout Thank you Commissioner Zanelli, my name is Jeremy Knout I work with RGP Planning Development Services our fum was contracted to complete the EIR fox the project and in Section 3.12 the utility section of the EIR actually addresses the issue related to water availability. We, the applicant have worked with Elsinore Valley Water, Municipal Water District. They have prepared a will serve letter and they've worked with the applicant in preparing a master water and sewer plan to determine one, the demand, two the availability, and three how that water is going to be stored onsite and delivered to the site and all those have been worked with in coordination with EVMWD who receives its water from WMWD and MWD all of them have been involved in the process and have I guess in a sense _ agreed to the demands caused by this project and the availability to provide to the residents and future residents. Zanelli Basically should have absolutely no impact on the well water in those areas? Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 23 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Knout That is true. there is, they would not be using the well system on site ox wells on site. There axe some wells fox residents but I'm not really sure about that but those would not be used as part of this project. The water would be delivered and that water that is available fox delivery to the site. Zanelli Thank you very much. I have no further questions. O'Neal Commissioner Flores. Flores Thank you Mx. Chairman. The Canyon Hills Draft Environmental Impact Report dated November 2006 was made available fox public review from November 10, 2006 and closed on December 27 of 2006. City of Lake Elsinore issued two notices of preparation in May of 2006 and one in June of 2006 with a 30 day public review period as required by CEQA. Three comment letters were received from Wildomax Incorporation now commonly known as WIN on the May of 2006 notice. No notices were submitted fox the June 2006 comment Negative Declaration Number 2006-02. During the review period 15 comment letters ox emails on the Draft EIR were received by the leading agenry relating to the accuracy of the environmental analysis contained in the Draft EIR report. The public review comment period as well as the State agencies and organization responded, response provided additional possible impacts within the Draft EIR report. To that end General Plan Amendment No. 2005-08 amended the City's General Land Use Map and changing the City's southern boundary. Zone Change No. 2005-9 changed the zoning project site to SP Specific Plan subject to the approval of Annexation No. 75 by the Riverside County Local Agenda Item No. Page PAGE 24 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Agency Formation Commission commonly known as LAFCO. On October 26 of 2006 LAFCO approved the boundary change by way of LAFCO 2006-105-1 and 3 amendment of the Sphere of Influence of the City of Lake Elsinore and removal from the Wildomax you've seen. The Draft EIR identified potential adverse impacts related to the implementation of this project but which would be mitigated to insufficient level by conditions imposed upon this project It has been determined unavoidable adverse impacts will result from implementation of this project but was outweighed by specific social economic and other benefits. A statement of overriding consideration was prepared which included the public concerns on traffic and circulation as well as air quality. I have reviewed and considered the EIR in compliance with CEQA, State CEQA Guidelines and the City's local CEQA Guidelines. I find all actions in the applicant's willingness in addressing both community and administrative concerns in compliance with the required draft environmental documents submitted before me, therefore it is my recommendation based on the findings and exhibits and conditions of approval to proceed to City Council fox final approval. No further comments. O'Neal Thank you Commissioner Flores. Commissioner Mendoza. Mendoza Thank you Mr. Chairman. I totally concur with my fellow Chairman, I mean my fellow Commissioners and there's been a lot, a lot of work put into this. Just looking at the Environmental Impact Report looking at all the other exhibits. There's been a lot, a lot of work put into this. I have one question fox the gentlemen about the water. If you could come up to the podium real quick please? Knout Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 25 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Yes sir. Mendoza If in fact that their well water is affected in any way, is Trlxmaxk prepared to deal with that problem and resolve it fox the residents outside the property line? I'm not saying it's going to, I'm just saying if it does have an impact in it. Knout I just want to go back to just one main point is that the wells will not be tapped fox the project itself. So in that effect, I'm not really sure how, we wouldn't, I would assume, I would have to defer to Trumark, but I believe that if there was an impact not caused by the project it would be hard to tell what would actually be the effect of that either there's a drop in water levels ox so forth. The project itself will not be touching the wells at all. All water will be delivered to the site and in effect also due to landscaping watering and so forth wells maybe I guess increase water levels will occur because as you know water seeps down into the aquifer below the wells so that may actually raise water levels in certain effect. In essence we would not be, ox the project would not be touching the wells at all. Mendoza Alright. Thank you. I'd just like to finish up by saying nobody likes change. We had a gentleman up here talking about change earlier. Nobody likes it but it's inevitable. It's going to happen. Whether it happens today, tonight, whether it happens five years from now. It's going to happen. Instead of fighting the change you should come up with a modification to the change. Say there's 1,000 homes going somewhere, instead of fighting it completely that you don't want 1,000 homes, you don't want change at all how about saying hey let's scale this back, let's move it back a little bit. You're too close to my property line. I'm sure all the property owners would be more sytnpatlfedc instead of you just trying to shut them down. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 26 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Because property owners have rights too. If they own a piece of property they have a right to do something with that piece of property as long as it's legal. If it's legal, they should, no one else should complain about it. I've said this before and I'll continue to say it because I never heaz anyone come in here and say hey he's a property owner, he has a right to do it but I don't want him to do it. All I hear is I don't want this going on, we don't want this going on. You know you have rights, they have rights. But the bottom line is as long as it's legal, as long as everyone does their homework, as long as our staff continue to due backbreaking work on research and they work well with whoever, whichever developer comes in they really can't do anything about the change. All they can do is modify the change and they need to realize that. Thank you Mx. Chairman. O'Neal Thank you. Vice Chair. Gonzales I have, I had this page open here on the streets because that was my main concern that I was going to be bringing up but appazently they're being addressed and County is looking at them also because something has to be done with those streets even though they axe doing as much as they can with part of it. So I'll leave that alone as we've already talked about it. I did meet with two of the developers, Vicki and Adrian and my concern at that time was right in here at the water tanks. I do not like water tanks at the top of a hill and they've assured me these will not be so I need, the ridgeline needs to be maintained so you don't see these big ugly water tanks. And I thank you fox that. The project is large and open I just hope when it's finished that this hill isn't torn up with bikes and so on. It's a beautiful site there. I've been here for 40 some years. Used to live in Wildomaz until the freeway came along but Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 27 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 I like this. Work on those roads we need to do something beyond that with the County because that is County land and Wildomax. Thank you. O'Neal Thank you. We have a number of resolutions to consider. Rolfe if you would start with the Draft EIR. Preisendanz MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 2006-02 FOR THE CANYON HILLS ESTATES PROJECT Preisendanz MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT KNOWN AS CANYON HILLS ESTATES IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN Preisendanz MOVED BY GONZALES, SECONDED BY ZANELLI, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0.2006-4 Agenda Item No Page of PAGE 28 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Preisendanz MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN N0.2006-01 Preisendanz MOVED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY GONZALES, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0.34249 Chairman O'Neal opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 p.m. 6. Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004-08 & Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Tentative Tract Map No. 31839 for finance and conveyance purposes. Director of Community Development Preisendanz provided a brief overview of the proposed project and requested Panning Consultant Miller to review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Miller provided an overview of the project. Applicant Pat Brown, who resides at 4060 Campus Drive, Suite 100, Newport Beach, CA 92660, states he has read the staff report and concurs with all the conditions that have been stated. No one wishes to speak on this paxticulaz item. Chairman O'Neal closed the Public Hearing closed at 7:10 pm. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 29 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Commissioner Flores commented that the project will be required to meet all of the same requirements of a Tentative Tract Map. He said it is his recommendation to proceed to City Council fox final approval. Commissioner Mendoza has no questions. Vice Chairman Gonzales points out that plans axe laid out in a potential flood zone and questions intentions as far as the flood zone is concerned. Applicant Pat Brown states that there is a flood zone. However, the site is three to four (3) to (4) feet above the flood zone and therefore adhering to City code. Applicant Brown is fully aware of the flood plane and will only be developing land that is out of the flood zone. States they will protect the residential areas. Vice Chairman is concerned with having residential homes placed directly in the flood zone Commissioner Zanelli has no questions MOVED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-11, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.2004- 08 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES. MOVED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY MENDOZA, AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1 TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION 2007-12, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA RECOMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.2004- 08 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31839 FOR FINANCE AND CONVEYANCE PURPOSES. Agenda Item No. Page PAGE 30 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 7. Zoning Code Text Amendment No. 2006-04, Zone Change No. 2006-10, Conditional Use Permit No. 2006-04, Commercial Design Review No. 2006- 03, Uniform Sign Program No. 2006-04, and Negative Declaration No. 2006- 08 for the Lake Elsinore Hotel and Casino Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz provided an overview of the project and requested Associate Planner Carlson to review it with the Commission and answer questions. Associate Planner Carlson provided an overview of the project. Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz says that staff realizes the history of this business in town and how long it's been here. His recommendation to the Planning Commission normally would be a recommendation of approval ox denial. He states that earlier in the process the applicant was asked to revise the plans and architecture. The applicant had xe-submitted the project and a lot of the comments had not been changed on the plans and the applicant expressed his desire to bring the project forward to the Planning Commission. In order to accommodate staff, a nuxnbex of Conditions of Approval were prepared to require plans to be revised to meet the Lake Elsinore Municipal, Compliance and Fixe Code. He would normally prefer that the plans incorporate design standards that axe compliant with the codes. However, if the Commission decided to move forward with this project the added Conditions will bring the project to compliance. A number of resolutions have been attached to the projects and feels confident that the applicant will do this at the end of this review period. He brings this forward to the Planning Commission fox their consideration. Chairman O'Neal said "We seem to be at odds between with what the applicant would like to see happen and what the staff would like to see happen", and asked him to comment on what Community Development Director Pxeisendanz said. The applicant said he is willing to accept of the Conditions regarding the changes proposed and move forward on that basis to do all three (3) sites at one time. Therefore, take all of the Conditions that staff proposed and do it concuxxendy. Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz states that the applicant has agreed to revise the plans to bring them up to code. In the terms of what is shown on the plans vs. what is required from the fire department, the conditions axe not consistent. His concern is that the applicant understands that having the plans pursuant to code will affect whether certain aspects of the project will move forward. Chairman O'Neal asks about fire access and wants to know exactly how much access staff is talking about. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 31 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - January 16, 2007 Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz says there is a drive aisle on the west side with a twenty (20) foot drive aisle between the building and the slope that would need a retaining wall to accommodate a twenty six (26) foot drive aisle. It is clarified that the site needs to be upgraded to meet the code. Applicant said this wasn't an issue in the project moving forward. As fax as all of the other Conditions, he has met the criteria. The only other issue was the twenty six foot (26) foot widening of the parking lot and that is not an issue and will get that taken care of. Chairman O'Neal clarifies that the applicant is asking for and what the City may ox may not accept is some kind of agreement in principle. City Attorney Santana stated yes, that would be accurate. Chairman O'Neal asked if the Planning Commission would accept an agreement and principal relying on the staff and the developer ox the owner to make the changes. Attomey Santana, Community Development Director Preisendanz and the applicant all agreed to this. Allan Dubex, 9131 Fletcher Pkwy Studio 119, La Mesa, California, states that he is the architect of this project He said in terms of a zone change and a Conditional Use Permit, the expansion of the areas that they would like to provide, usually with the Condition Use Permits, there are Conditions associated fox approval and if the owner wants to abide by those conditions, he thinks they can make all the accommodations for all the legal access fox fire and public safety. He wants to beautify this corner of the property by the addition of the external treatments they axe doing to the property. He says the impact they have for the major expansion of the bar and lounge is on the west side of the property and the office space on the south facing is approximately one hundred feet behind the entrance area seen. He says that they are trying to beautify and be a good neighbor of the City of Lake Esinore. Chairman O'Neal closed the Public hearing closed at 7:35 pm. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Mendoza states that as long as the applicant is willing to abide by the Conditions he has no other questions. He notices inconsistencies with the plans vs. the Conditions but if the applicant and the architect have agreed to comply, he has no more questions. Vice Chair Gonzales has no questions. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 32 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Commissioner Zanelli says that he has been by the project site and noticed several motor homes parked along the western wall and wonders if there will be any provision made fox a designated parking area fox recreational vehicles and motor homes to keep the parking lot clear Applicant states that his main goal is to make the project more of a "destination location" which is why they axe remodeling the building. Their main objective is to get away from the history of the location and not have the recreational vehicles in the parking area any longer. He states they will not be designating any more area fox those kind of vehicles. Commissioner Zanelli asks if there axe any plans fox the parking lot on the eastern side of the structure between the Casino and the ballroom? Applicant says they axe doing the current project as Phase One and then intend to immediately start on the eastern building and repave that parking lot, and start on the ballroom and use that as a convention type of area where they can have parties and weddings. Commissioner Zanelli has no other questions Commissioner Flores states it's his understanding the intent of amending chapter 17.48 c2 general commercial district is to allow card rooms in the c2 zoning district as a conditional use. He fords this a necessity fox staff fox the amplification and formation of card rooms within the boundaries of our city. The requested zone change is found to be consistent with the surrounding zoning and existing land uses and he finds this compatible with the General Commercial General Plan. The request fox the Conditional Use Permit fox the expansion and the continue operation of the existing bar, cocktail lounge, and outdoor patio is in accord with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the zoning district ui which the project is currently located. To that end, the uniform sign program will achieve the same. As fox the proposed negative dedaxation, based on the evaluation of the contests submitted for review and comment, he found the submitted report in conformance with the general guidelines within the scope of the envixontnental impacts. Therefore, based on the fmdings and exhibits and Conditions of Approval, it is his recommendation that the applicant proceed to City CouncIl fox approval ox denial. Chairperson O'Neal thinks this upgrade is long needed, and he will be more than happy to vote in favor of this. City Attorney Santana said that each motion that is made on the each resolution about to be considered should indicate whether you axe making a motion for approval ox for denial, since staffs recommendation was fox consideration. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 33 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 MOTIONED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY GONZALES AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2007-13, RESOULTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTION OF NEGATIE DECLARATION NO. 2006-08 OR THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 2006-04, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006- 04, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03, AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO. MOTIONED BY MENDOZA, SECONDED BY FLORES AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 2007-14, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT THE PROJECT IDENTIFIED AS TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-04 ZONE CHANGE 2006-10 , CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2006-04, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2006-OS FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO IS CONSISTANT WITH THE MULTI SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN. MOTIONED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2007-15, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA RECOMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINACE TEXT AMENDMENT 2006-04. MOTIONED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2007-16, RESOLUTION OF THE Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 34 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA RECOMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2006-10 TO RE- ZONE THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 20930, 20970, AND 21000 MILAGA ROAD FROM C1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMERCIAL TO C2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL. MOTIONED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY GONZALES PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2007-17, RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2006-04 FOR THE EXPANSION AND CONTINUED OPERATION OF AND EXISTING BAR, COCKTAIL LOUNGE, AND OUTDOOR PATIO ASSOCIATED WITH THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO. MOTIONED BY FLORES, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 FOR AN APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE OF RESOLUTION 2007-18, RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVAL OF COMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2006-03 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO. MOTIONED BY ZANELLI, SECONDED BY MENDOZA AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-0 FOR APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE OF RESOLUTION 2007-19 A RESOLTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM NO. 2006-04 FOR THE LAKE ELSINORE HOTEL AND CASINO. BUSINESS ITEMS None Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 35 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 STAFF COMMENTS Public Woxk Director Seumalo states a brief CIP update, the working days fox the Grand Ortega Interchange and signal project and the Railroad Canyon Road slope repair project started yesterday so work signs will be going up along with changes in those areas. The Lincoln Street Paxk and the Main Street Paxk axe moving forward with their improvements and should be done shortly; he has no specific dates fox those project completions. The design fox the Lincoln Street paving has been completed and a contract should be out in a couple of months after the bidding process. The gravel road paving project is still moving forward, they axe putting together specifications fox the next phase of year one. Planning Manager Weiner states the City is making strides in improving customer service regarding phone calls and getting a live person. Director of Community Development Preisendanz announces a Smdy Session on February 1, 2007, with the Planning Commission and City Council at 5:00 pm at the Cultural Centex. The item of discussion will be the review process, and present a power point presentation on the design review process and will identify the process of the California Environmental Quality Act and the MSHCP, and on Thursday, January 18, 2007, there is a Mid-Year Budget Review Study Session at 4:30 pm with City Council. Also, he wanted to let the Planning Commission know these is a line item in the budget fox Planning Commission education and travel expenses and trying to identify various conference that might be applicable to the Commissioners fox further education. He said thank you for the Casino Project and enduring with him fox the recommendation and fox the patience with that and for all of the hard work. Deputy City Attorney has a follow up comment to a series of comments she made at the last meeting with regard to the Brown Act. She is clarifying that if she implied that it would be improper fox you under the Spoke and Wheel Theory to meet with any developer that is not what she intended. Hex thought was that it is improper fox a developer ox yourself to share third party information from another developer ox commissioner. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Commissioner Zanelli thanks staff. Commissioner Flores thanks staff. Commissioner Mendoza thanks staff. Vice Chair Gonzales thanks staff. Agenda Item No. Page of PAGE 36 -PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -January 16, 2007 Chairman O'Neal makes a request from Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz to have the latest version of the General Plan. Director of Community Development Pxeisendanz states he will get him a copy. ADJOURNMENT THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, CHAIRMAN O'NEAL ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 8:06 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Kris Herrington Office Specialist III ATTEST: Rolfe Preisendanz, Director of Community Development Agenda Item No. Page of