HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-01-1997 NAHMINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 1, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 1, 1997, WAS CALLED DUE TO THE HOLIDAY (NEW
YEAR'S DAY).
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MATTHIES (Commissioner Matthies arrived at 7:12
P.M.)
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planners De Gauge and
Villa, and City Engineer O'Donnell.
MINUTE ACTION
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Barnes and carried by a vote of 4 -0
to approve the Minutes of December 4, 1996, December 18, 1996, and January 1, 1997, as
submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 96 -9 - Preston Smith (Tomlison & Sons)
Associate Planner Villa explained the proposal is to establish a golf range (Smitty's
Driving Range) for three years with the option of yearly extensions on approximately 19.5
acres at the northwest corner of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive. The operation
provides 30 driving tees, a sand trap, a putting green and 33 parking spaces. The range
has been designed with a length of 300 yards, the minimum distance recommended by
Time -Saver Standards for Building Types, and two barrier nets are proposed. One net
will be placed to protect the adjacent apartment complex and the other placed along
Riverside Drive. An office trailer and storage shed are also proposed. Hours of operation
are from 8:00 a.m. to dusk seven days a week. Also, proposed is the sale of used golf
clubs balls, snacks, and golf lessons will be provided. He then highlighted staff's concern
with the ball deflecting fencing (condition 10), and street dedication (Conditions 13 -19),
and stated the applicant has submitted a letter requesting deletion of the dedication
requirements. It is recommended the Commission approve the proposal subject to
Exhibits A, B, C and subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Dick Bellack, owner of Grand Oak Apartment, stated he favored anything to make the
City better and this will if done properly. He expressed concern on security lighting, and
requested this lighting face south because the apartment complex is north. Also, there
is a school bus zone located north of this project, approximately 20 feet from the
northwest corner, and this should be considered, safety is a concern. He requested the
deflecting netting be a neutral color for visual aesthetics. He commented on the hours
of operation and stated there is no problem with the daytime operation, but if night
operations are proposed then lighting would be of concern. Mr. Bellack then inquired
about the landscaping to be provided, especially the back side visible from the apartment
complex.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none,
the public hearing was closed at 7:10 p.m.
Commissioner Schiffner stated he has no objections to the proposal, and would like the
concerns expressed by Mr. Bellack incorporated. Commissioner Schiffner asked whether
the school bus zone was given consideration. Mr. Smith stated the school bus zone was
considered and the entrance was moved down approximately 50 feet, and if necessary can
move it further south. The primary concern is safety and any adjustment will be
addressed before initiation of any renovation. Mr. Smith then explained that the
deflective netting is only available in dark green or black.
Commissioner Matthies arrived at 7:12 p.m.
Chairman Wilsey asked that landscaping and lighting be addressed. Community
Development Director Leslie explained the driving range would be grass /turf and
maintained, and more intensified landscaping would front the parking lot on Grand
Avenue and around the buildings. The landscaping on the northern property line would
be grass, more or less. Mr. Smith stated security lighting will point away from the
apartment building. Community Development Director Leslie explained the conditions
require that there be no lighting on the driving range itself and security lighting is
allowed; however, it must be shielded and directed on -site to prevent glare onto
neighboring properties.
Commissioner Barnes referred to the number of customers anticipated and asked if public
restroom facilities and drinking fountains were required. Mr. Smith stated restroom
facilities meeting OSHA requirements will be provided, and a drinking fountain and cold
drinks will be available. Commissioner Barnes asked if landscape maintenance and golf
ball retrieval would be contracted out. Mr. Smith responded in the negative and
explained the partners will take care of all labor and there will be no employees. Mr.
Smith stated the City will also be named on the liability insurance policy. Commissioner
Barnes asked if there was another street or driveway directly across from the entrance to
the driving range. Associate Planner Villa responded in the negative.
Commissioner Matthies stated all of her questions have been answered.
Commissioner Sands referred to the last sentence listed under Areas of Concern of the
Staff Report, Page 2: "Consequently, the revised plan does not include the required
dedication in anticipation of the Planning Commission's consideration." What plan?
Associate Planner Villa stated the plan distributed with the packet does not contain the
required dedication, and when staff requested the applicant revise the plan it was designed
without the required dedication in hopes these requirements would be waived.
Commissioner Sands asked the City Engineer to clarify the requirements for dedication.
City Engineer O'Donnell stated the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) could be in place for
six years and the City could be looking at improving the intersection at Riverside Drive
and Grand Avenue in the future, but not for 5 -10 years. The dedication is not a
requirement of the ordinance and Planning Commission can waive the dedication.
Commissioner Sands referred to the applicant's letter requesting relief from conditions 13-
19 and yet it is indicated that condition 14 will be completed. Mr. Smith stated condition
14 was listed inadvertently. Commissioner Sands referred to condition 15 and asked if
this affects the dimensions of the driving range. Mr. Smith responded in the negative and
explained there is an unpaved area approximately 30 feet from the paved road to the
border fence, so it wouldn't reflect on the plans at this time. Community Development
Director Leslie stated that if 20 feet were dedicated on Grand Avenue the entire plan
would have to shift 20 feet to the east; the 30 -foot dedication on Riverside Drive may not
have much of an impact, and due to the size of the property believes there is sufficient
room for the shift in the plan, it is a matter of whether the dedication is required now or
in the future. Commissioner Sands inquired about the costs associated with conditions
16 and 17. Community Development Director Leslie stated he could not provide a cost
for dedication and deed preparation, condition 16. Condition 17 is independent of the
dedication and an encroachment permit must be issued as long as a driveway is proposed
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
on Grand Avenue. Commissioner Sands stated he favored waiving the dedication
requirement since this is a temporary use. Community Development Director Leslie
stated condition 18 may not be applicable it will depend on whether access is taken off
Riverside Drive.
Commissioner Barnes suggested the addition of condition 20: "The sign will be brought
back to the Planning Commission for approval." Chairman Wilsey asked whether the
standard condition for signage could be included. Community Development Director
Leslie stated this can be added as a condition if it is the desire of the Commission;
however, signage for an individual business is simply required to comply with Code
requirements. Chairman Wilsey inquired about the signage proposed. Mr. Smith stated
the sign will indicate Smitty's Driving Range, and will be V- shaped so it is visible coming
east, west, north or south on Riverside Drive. Community Development Director Leslie
asked if the sign would be illuminated. Mr. Smith responded in the negative.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to the dedication and asked if this alters the layout, if
moved 20 feet to the northeast. Mr. Smith stated that as far as the flight of the ball no;
however, the fence that will border the apartment was put in a strategic position and the
fence that borders Riverside Drive is more of a security fence. Commissioner Schiffner
stated that it would not then be a problem to move this 20 feet further from Grand
Avenue. Mr. Smith stated the only concern is if they had to move the fencing, as there
is an existing fence line and would incur a great expense. Commissioner Schiffner stated
he was not interested in requiring dedication from the property owner at this time, but
would like the layout to reflect the space so that dedication is possible in the future.
Chairman Wilsey stated this is a temporary use and dedication would place an undue
burden on the applicant and would recommend deletion of condition 15 and 16. He
suggested condition 18 be amended by adding the words "if applicable" to the end. He
then referred to the applicant's letter requesting relief from condition 13, and asked the
City Engineer to clarify. City Engineer O'Donnell stated condition 13 requires the
applicant to comply with the requirements of the Municipal Code. Chairman Wilsey
stated the typographical error in condition 2 should be corrected. He then asked if there
would be a problem with amending condition 2 by adding the following verbiage: "After
the third Conditional Use Permit staff review the applicant would be required at that time
to do the dedication." City Engineer O'Donnell stated the parking lot and trailers will be
at a certain distance and this would require relocation, and suggested the conditions be
waived if thought to be a burden.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96 -9 BASED ON THE FINDINGS, EXHIBITS A,
B, C AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE
STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS.
Condition No. 2: The Conditional Use Permit shall expire three (3) years from the
date of Planning Commission approval. The Community
Development Director may issue extensions of time on a yearly
basis.
Condition
Condition
or Ws agent. Deeds shall be subwAaed ta the Engineer-ing
..
pefff4t. DELETED.
Condition No. 18: Applicant shall obtain any necessary Caltrans permits and meet all
Caltrans requirements if applicable.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
2. Zone Code Amendment 97 -2 - City of Lake Elsinore
Associate Planner De Gange explained the proposal is to amend Chapter 17.98 of the
Zoning Ordinance (Temporary Outdoor Activities), as suggested by the Commission and
discussed at a Joint Planning Commission and City Council Study Session on March 19,
1996. He detailed the reasons for the amendment as follows: to provide clarification on
the uses allowed and duration of uses; with the adoption of the Special Events Ordinance
(Chapter 5.73 of the Municipal Code) there is overlap between what is allowed in
Temporary Outdoor Activities and what is governed under the Special Events Permit, and;
the current code does not address certain temporary uses. This amendment proposes to
eliminate those portions of Chapter 17.98 where reference is made to "Outdoor Activities"
and to add additional categories relative to Temporary Uses. It is recommended the
Commission recommend to City Council approval of Zone Code Amendment 97 -2 based
on the Findings.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak in favor. Hearing none, he asked for those opposed. Hearing none, he asked for
anyone wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at
7:49 p.m.
Commissioner Sands complimented staff on their work and stated the report is very
thorough and complete. He then referred to the Seasonal Temporary Use Permit and
asked how often the applicant has to pay the $500.00 fee. Associate Planner De Gange
stated it is designed to be paid every year, but would suggest it be placed on a Cost
Recovery System, and explained that if the use was to be done every year then the types
of issues and amount of analysis that goes into the approval would be less. Community
Development Director explained the Cost Recovery System and stated if the use is done
on a yearly basis with the same set -up there will probably be very little review in
subsequent years therefore the deposit required each year would be nominal.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to the Short-term Temporary Use Permit and asked if
two working days were sufficient for staff to review and issue a permit. Community
Development Director Leslie responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Schiffner then
commented on the duration of the Seasonal Temporary Use Permit, and asked Mr. Craig
if 120 days were sufficient. Mr. Craig stated this is about 2 weeks short of an ideal
season, but with weather conditions usually not open for more than 120 days.
Commissioner Schiffner asked whether extensions could be applied for. Community
Development Director Leslie stated extensions would not be allowed as it is considered
a temporary use.
Commissioner Barnes thanked staff for a very factual, concise presentation and report.
He stated this will clear up confusion with Chapter 17.98, and has no questions.
Chairman Wilsey stated this gives staff the flexibility they have been looking for.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONE CODE
AMENDMENT 97 -2 BASED ON THE FINDINGS LISTED IN THE STAFF
REPORT.
BUSINESS ITEMS
3. Amendment to Sign Program for the Winston Plaza - Louis Goodman (Electro -Lite Sign
Com an
Associate Planner Villa explained the proposal is an amendment to the approved Sign
Program and Design Review of a 5 -foot high monument sign for the Winston Tire Plaza
at 31762 Mission Trail. The applicant proposes to remove the first paragraph in the
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
approved Sign Program, which reads: "The Winston Plaza identification sign shall be the
only freestanding sign permitted within the center" and replace it with the following
verbiage: "Secondary tenant signage shall be available on a new 5 foot high, 20 s.f.
double -faced illuminated cabinet to be sited to the southwest of the primary identification
sign. New sign cabinet and pole cover will be finished to match primary identification
sign. White acrylic plastic faces will be divided into four panels for tenant identification.
Tenant identification graphics must match the color of the sign on the building units."
He then explained the proposed monument sign was revised to be compatible with the
existing architectural style, and staff recommends the Commission consider the applicants
request.
Commissioner Schiffner stated concern with the additional monument sign, and asked
whether consideration was given to adding additional panels to the existing sign. He
stated his preference is an addition to the existing sign. But this may not feasible at this
time and favors giving the opportunity to advertise the business.
Commissioner Barnes stated he had no questions at this time.
Commissioner Matthies stated she concurs with Commissioner Schiffner.
Commissioner Sands asked if the applicant was present, and if Winston Plaza was to be
indicated on the 5 -foot monument sign. Mr. Obey Erlenmeyer, Electro -Lite Sign
Company, responded in the negative and explained that additional design is a problem
with the dimension of the sign, 20 square feet or 3 x 6.5 feet. Commissioner Sands
inquired about the width of the monument sign and whether tile could be incorporated.
Mr. Erlemneyer stated the width is 18 inches and that it would be difficult to keep it
within the 5 -foot height.
Commissioner Barnes asked if any landscaping had to be removed, other than turf. Mr.
Erlenmeyer stated only turf.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO THE SIGN PROGRAM FOR WINSTON
PLAZA AND THE 5 -FOOT MONUMENT SIGN.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
AT 8:06 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 8:11 P.M.
INFORMATIONAL
4. Live Entertainment - Diamond Snorts Bar at 31762 A -F Mission Trail
Community Development Director Leslie explained that Diamond Sports Bar is located
within the Winston Plaza, and in February 1996, a CUP was approved for the sports bar.
The owner has indicated to staff that they would like to start having live entertainment
at their establishment on a semi- regular basis. Live entertainment was not discussed in
the Staff Report to the Commission nor at the public hearing; however, the applicant
noted this aspect on the application to ABC for an alcoholic beverage license and
included a copy of this application with the CUP application. Mr. Leslie stated that as
Community Development Director he reviewed the request for live entertainment and
based on the amount and type of live entertainment proposed determined that live
entertainment could be covered under the existing CUP. Staff is informing the
Commission of this determination since live entertainment was not mentioned at the
hearing for CUP 95 -11, and that the Commission need not take any further action unless
they wish to appeal the determination.
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked what live entertainment is being referred to. Community
Development Director Leslie stated the owner proposes to bring in 1 -3 musicians using
unamplified instruments with the exception of a microphone for vocals. Also, patron
dancing would be allowed to go along with the music. Chairman Wilsey stated he would
not have any objection as long as they did not detour from the business and hours of
operation, nor conflicts with neighboring businesses or safety problems created.
Community Development Director Leslie explained the live entertainment would run with
the hours of operation and the business hours are later in the evening, compared to other
businesses in the center, and this issue was brought up with the shared parking situation.
The Commission concurred with the Community Development Director's determination
that live entertainment could be covered under the existing CUP.
5. Proposed Crematory at 18650 Collier Avenue - Johanna Jordan
Community Development Director Leslie stated a business license application for a
crematory was received, within the Ayres Industrial Complex. The applicant is seeking
the business license on the basis that there is an existing crematory and another crematory
would be allowed. He further explained that a crematorium is not listed as a permitted
use in any zoning district within the City. There are provisions in the Zoning Code that
if the Community Development Director can make a finding that a proposed use is similar
to uses permitted then the Community Development Director can permit that use. A
crematorium is not permitted with a CUP in any of the districts either, but there is a
section indicating that if the Planning Commission can make a finding that a use is
similar to other uses listed then the use can be allowed by CUP. Mr. Leslie stated that
as Community Development Director he made the determination that the use is not
similar to other uses listed as permitted in the district, and indicated to the applicant that
they would have to apply for a CUP and this would have to be done prior to the issuance
of a business license. The applicant is appealing this determination and has requested the
matter be brought up with the Commission.
Community Development Director Leslie referred to the existing crematory located on
Crane Street in the Central Business Park complex, and explained that a previous
Community Development Director made a finding that the use had some characteristics
similar to other businesses permitted in that zoning district. The Zoning Code stipulates
that if a finding is made that a use is similar that it be put in writing and put on file in
the Planning Department, and in the future if other uses come in they too would be
permitted. Although, the Community Development Director made a finding in this case
and allowed the use outright, this previous allowance was not written into any official
policy; therefore, it has been determined this was a case specific allowance. Community
Development Director Leslie then explained that part of the determination to require a
CUP was based on the fact that since the other crematory has gone in the City has
received a number of complaints. The complaints range from visual smoke, odor, and
residue from the exhaust; however, the main complaint has been visual smoke.
Chairman Wilsey asked if there were any questions for staff from the table. Receiving
no response, he recognized Mr. Frank Strunk, Jr., 116 Quail Gardens Drive, Encinitas,
Accu -Care Cremation Center -- Lakeside Crematory.
Mr. Strunk stated they chose Lake Elsinore because of its proximity to Riverside and San
Diego. He explained they have a cremation service already in operation in San Diego and
utilize other crematoriums for the cremation process. He then provided a brief history
on the creation of low cost cremation services, and stated with their own crematorium
they could offer their services to the public at a reasonable cost. Mr. Strunk referred to
the complaints received regarding residue and asked if staff knew what residue was being
talked about, specifically. Community Development Director Leslie stated he did not
know and that the descriptions listed on the complaints received were vague. Mr. Strunk
stated he would answer any questions.
PAGE SEVEN - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked about the temperature for cremation. Mr. Strunk stated the
temperature for cremation ranges between 1900 -2100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Chairman Wilsey then recognized Mr. Richard Alvarez, 27999 Front Street, Temecula.
Mr. Alvarez stated he was assisting Mr. Strunk with the crematory, and submitted a letter
from the property owner and neighboring businesses indicating they were agreeable to the
use. He stated the facility will contain one cremation chamber, it is a self - contained
chamber, and will emit no odors or smoke. The only emission involved is heat wave,
which is colorless and odorless. Mr. Alvarez stated a crematory must be licensed with
the State Crematory Board, which the applicant has been for twenty years, and they have
stringent guidelines. Also, operation cannot begin until approval has been granted from
the Air Quality Management District, again stringent guidelines. He then highlighted the
State Board of Federal Funeral Directors' guidelines.
Mr. Alvarez stated the existing crematory uses a N20AA chamber that costs
approximately $35,000. The chamber proposed is a Phoenix Z and costs around $60,000,
and this chamber is superior and has more safety precautions. Therefore, because
crematoriums are heavily monitored by stringent rules from State agencies and along with
new up to date machines, it should in no way impose any risk to the public. Mr. Alvarez
stated the problem with obtaining a CUP is the time frame involved. A unit has to be
reserved, but the applicant cannot afford to lease a unit if they do not know if the CUP
will be granted. Mr. Alvarez stated he would answer any questions.
Commissioner Barnes asked if on -site storage facilities had to be provided for the remains
prior to cremation. Mr. Strunk responded in the affirmative, and explained a walk -in
storage facility cooled to 43 -48 degrees would be with the cremation camber.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to the letter from the manufacturer and the statement
"We currently have three of our units operating just a few block from this proposed
location." Mr. Strunk stated he believes this statement refers to the different types of
units /models as this is one company. Commissioner Schiffner stated the Commission has
been put in a tough position to refuse, since another organization has been permitted to
do the same thing, in the same area, the same zoning without a CUP and asked how this
situation is to be handled. Chairman Wilsey stated the proposed crematory is requesting
to go into an existing commercial or manufacturing multi -unit complex and being one
tenant or one unit; whereas, the existing crematory is in a building unto itself.
Commissioner Sands asked for the distance between the existing and proposed crematory.
Chairman Wilsey stated approximately one -half mile. Commissioner Sands asked when
the existing crematory received approval. Community Development Director Leslie stated
he could not provide an exact date, but it was in 1993.
Chairman Wilsey stated he did not have a problem with another crematory coming into
the community. However, because this utilizes one unit of a multi -unit commercial
complex and due to the comments, questions and concerns with the other facility in
operation would favor using a CUP to place guidelines on the proposed crematory for
better control and provide research time.
It was the consensus of the Commission to require the applicant to apply for a
Conditional Use Permit.
Mr. Alvarez inquired about fast tracking the CUP and stated that due to the low vacancy
rates in the City the landlord may not keep the unit available for the tenant and they will
be able to get a CUP but not have a unit. Community Development Director Leslie stated
staff could fast track the CUP as the use proposed does not involve any outward
improvements so the review would concentrate on the use. He then explained the hearing
process and stated the earliest hearing date would be February 19, 1997. Mr. Alvarez
stated his concern is the fee for the CUP, and that the unit has to be retained for this time
PAGE EIGHT - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 15, 1997
period and asked whether they have a chance in securing a CUP. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that through the CUP process if it can be shown that
the various concerns raised by complaints received and the issues raised this evening can
be adequately addressed and mitigated that support for the CUP can be found. Chairman
Wilsey stated that it also gives an opportunity to formally notice neighbors and address
at any adverse reactions.
Commissioner Barnes asked if the utilities needed are available and whether propane
would be needed. Mr. Alvarez explained the unit is run off gas and gas meters are
already in place.
STAFF COMMENTS
Nothing to report.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Barnes
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Schiffner
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Matthies
Complimented staff on the work done on the Temporary Outdoor Activities Zone Code
Amendment.
Chairman Wilsev
Asked staff for an update on the entry park and the multi - purpose trail system at 888
Development. Community Development Director Leslie stated staff would have to check the
status of these improvements and report back. Chairman Wilsey suggested a complete report be
presented at the next meeting, and also suggested staff go back and review the records and the
original plans submitted by the original owner.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:50 P.M.
AL WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Respectfully Submitted,
E;;& (iWndsfaff - - - -- --
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schiffner.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, SCHIFFNER, MATTHIES AND WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie and Associate Planners De Gange
and Villa.
MINUTE ACTION
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Matthies and carried by a vote of
4 -0 to approve the Minutes of January 15, 1997, as submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mariana Mohylyn, 305 West Sumner, stated she would like to comment on signage. Chairman
Wilsey asked Ms. Mohylyn to defer her comments to the end of the meeting.
There being no further request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. General Plan Amendment 97 -1 and Zone Change 96 -3 - Missing Link Investors II
Associate Planner De Gange explained the proposal is to amend the General Plan Land
Use Map changing the land use designation of a 30.4 acre site located along Camino Del
Norte, approximately 2000 feet south of the intersection of 2nd Street, from
Neighborhood Commercial and Future Specific Plan Area "G" to General Commercial.
This proposal is being initiated by the owner of two of the six parcels (25.2 acres) of the
site. He then detailed the reasons for the General Plan Amendment as the site's size,
proximity to I -15, and absence of residential uses surrounding the subject site. Also, a
request for a change of zone from R -1 (Single - Family Residential) and M -1 (Limited
Manufacturing) to C -2 (General Commercial) is being sought to bring the zoning into
conformance with the General Plan. If the determination is not to amend the General
Plan then the applicant and staff would recommend the zoning proceed, currently it is
neither consistent with the existing General Plan designation of Neighborhood
Commercial nor with the proposed designation of General Commercial. It is
recommended the Commission recommend to City Council approval of Mitigated
Negative Declaration 97 -1, General Plan Amendment 97 -1 and Zone Change 96 -3.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak in favor. Hearing none, he asked for those opposed. Hearing none, he asked for
anyone wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at
7:08 p.m.
Commissioner Matthies stated she has no comments.
Commissioner Sands stated concurrence with staff's reasoning for inclusion of the
additional four parcels, as contained in the Analysis section of the Staff Report.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1997
Commissioner Schiffner stated this is a good idea, and hopes the reason for this is that
someone has plans for this property in the not to distance future.
Chairman Wilsey stated concurrence with Commissioner Schiffner.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 97 -1,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97 -1 AND ZONE CHANGE 96 -3 BASED ON
THE FINDINGS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ADOPT RESOLUTION
97 -1, ENTITLED AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -1
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 GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 97 -1 (MISSING LINK INVESTORS II)
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Sign Program for Douglas Burger Restaurant at 18461 Dexter Avenue
Associate Planner Villa explained that Condition No. 19 of Commercial Project 95 -2
required review and approval of the proposed Sign Program. The Sign Program contains
criteria for a freestanding monument sign and directional sign, menu board, wall signs,
and a freestanding freeway sign to be attached to Chevron's existing 40' high sign pole.
Staff had concern with the aesthetics of the menu board; however, the applicant has
submitted designs addressing this concern. As proposed the Sign Program meets all
requirements of the Municipal Code, and staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Sands stated the company has been in business for a long time and knows
what they are doing and finds nothing wrong with their request.
Commissioner Schiffner stated concurrence with Commissioner Sands.
Commissioner Matthies commented on the menu board and asked for verification on the
statement contained in the Analysis section of the Staff Report indicating the applicant
would add a stucco texture color similar to the main building. Chairman Wilsey stated
that he believes this is reflected in the new designs submitted.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO APPROVE THE
MASTER/UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE
STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
At this time, Chairman Wilsey recognized Mariana Mohylyn.
Ms. Mohylyn commented on signage and stated there is disservice to the person that owns
property that is not developed, maybe not even developable and real estate taxes are great, money
is being taken from the owner and used for various things by the County and City, but when it
comes to the sign it is prohibited. Ms. Mohylyn requested the Commission give consideration
to research and possibly amending Section 17.94.170, Signs in Commercial Districts, and Section
17.94.090, Prohibited Signs.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1997
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
AT 7:17 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 7:21 P.M.
INFORMATIONAL
3. Status Report on Entry Park and Multi- puinose Trail System at 888 Development
Community Development Director Leslie stated a full report has not been provided as
there are issues that still need checking. The report presented explains what the tentative
tract map conditions of approval, design review and development agreement call for. He
stated the mini -park, to be located on the southerly side of Terra Cotta at Lincoln, is
required to be constructed within a time reasonably required to improve the entire
property. So, the City would be within their rights to withhold release of the last units
if the park has not been constructed. The multi - purpose trail is less specific although it
is generally accepted that the trail would have to be completed at the same time as the
park. The developer has approached staff with an interest in proceeding with improving
the park site and the trail, at least in the area they are currently building. The developer's
hesitation to proceed pertains to the credit for parkland dedication and the cost for
improving the trail and feels the total costs exceed their entire credit, in -lieu of paying
the park fee. Therefore, they are hesitant to move forward until either redesign of the
park site can be accomplished to lower the costs too within their fee credit, or the City
indicates a willingness to enter into a reimbursement agreement for any costs that exceed
their fee credit. Also, with the passage of Proposition 218 the City has to look at funding
maintenance of parks. Right now, park maintenance is funded through the Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District, but to keep doing this it would have to be put to a
vote of the people. The City Council has indicated they will look at bringing a general
tax measure to the City in June. If this measure does not pass in June it is not decided
how parks will continue to be maintained.
Chairman Wilsey asked if the outline regarding the preparation of the multi - purpose
system is set out in the development agreement and set in concrete. Community
Development Director Leslie explained the development agreement addresses the park,
and the condition on the trail is from the conditions of approval on the tract map.
Chairman Wilsey referred to condition 18.b. and provided a brief overview on the trail
system and stated there were no specific guidelines about how trail development would
proceed. He noted a past concern was to detour motorcycles by placing piping at the
entrance. Also, grass and hydroseeding was not anticipated, it was to be DG and possibly
have a 30 inch wide asphalt walking trail, if funds were available.
Community Development Director Leslie stated staff has talked with K. Hovanian about
the extension of this trail and certain aspects on ingress /egress have come up, specifically
at Zieglinde and Shirley. He asked Chairman Wilsey if he had some knowledge and
involvement of that in the past. Chairman Wilsey stated that an opening was discussed
at those locations with possibly a post in the middle to prevent ingress /egress from
motorcycles. Community Development Director Leslie stated K. Hovnanian has put in
the trail and built a wall from Lincoln back to Shirley Drive. This was done because
there is an easement belonging to the Water District that runs partly along Shirley and
partly along this trail. K. Hovnanian has approached the Water District about building
the wall in their easement and the Water District is agreeable, except there is a water line
in the area that needs replacing, and the Water District would like the water line replaced
at the same time, at the developer's cost. This water line is not needed to serve K.
Hovanian's tract, so they are hesitant to move ahead. K. Hovanian has requested in -lieu
of building the 3 -foot high block wall that they build a wood dowel fence; however, this
would have to be brought back before the Commission as the condition is specific about
the block wall. Asked whether the people involved with this fencing were tied to a low
block wall or if it was just a barrier of some type.
PAGE FOUR PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1997
Chairman Wilsey stated from his recollection the primary goal was to keep motorcycles
out. He suggested consideration be given to plastic simulated wood as an alternate
material. Also, when the trail was being reviewed on that side there were three very
specific entry points onto that trail system from the back alley way on both sides of Le
Gaye. He stated the existing block wall behind St. Pierre does not contain an opening,
and there is a large area running from Machado and Lincoln, the area behind the backside
of St. Pierre, where the last two property owners on St. Pierre have fenced off their own
fences. This area affords a 15 -foot right -of -way that belongs to the County and the
remaining area belongs to the County Flood Control. Community Development Director
Leslie stated the Chairman is correct in that the block wall on St. Pierre does not contain
any openings. The condition requires that openings be provided; however, the property
owners were to be approached and asked whether they wanted openings and if they did
not want openings then the wall was to be constructed so that openings could be made
in the future.
A brief discussion ensued on the 15 -foot County right -of -way and County Flood Control
property, and whether the City could put in a request to the County to transfer the
property, if not too late, and notice the property owners.
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie informed the Commission of the following:
1. Lakeside Crematorium submitted materials /fees for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and
withdrew the same day. Their concern pertained to the fact that a CUP could be appealed
to City Council, and the landlord gave them a deadline for leasing the unit and the appeal
period would go beyond that deadline. They indicated a desire to locate in Lake Elsinore,
but would look for another location. Also, a private investigator was in today and was
looking into how the other crematorium got approval.
2. Plans have been received for El Pollo Loco at Elsinore City Center; however, no
application or fees have been submitted. Also, an application has been received for
World Savings at Elsinore City Center.
3. Plans have been received for an Arco AM/PM at Nichols Road. The layout for the pads
contain a gas station with a drive - through, a drive - through restaurant and a sit -down
restaurant is envisioned.
4. The project proposed by USA Properties will be moving forward, and will answer any
questions.
Chairman Wilsey stated the Commission reviewed the original project and rejected. The
court said to fast track, does fast track mean it will bypass the Commission? Community
Development Director Leslie responded in the affirmative and explained the outcome of
the legal action and modification to the plans. Chairman Wilsey stated for the record
he would like to vent his frustration and anger with elected judges doing this sort of
thing. Can see where he would say fast track it, but fast track does not mean he has
design authority in our community and judges throughout the State of California and the
Country seem to take it upon themselves to dictate what they want throughout our society
and it is getting rather frustrating for me. I see judges making constitutional concepts
instead of the people, and this is an excellent example of judges coming along and
circumventing our check and balance in the community. Community Development
Director Leslie stated staff prepared a draft Negative Declaration in case
Commission /Council did approve the project and since they didn't it was not approved but
the judge approved it, and according to the California Environmental Quality Act the City
is the lead agency and somehow the judge took that over too.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to the problems Paradise Chevrolet is having with regard
to water /sewer and asked whether this approval helps alleviate those problems.
Community Development Director Leslie explained that both developers will share the
cost.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked about the construction occurring in this area now. Community
Development Director Leslie explained that Eastern Municipal Water District is installing
an 84 -inch reclaimed water line and a 30 -inch unreclaimed water line. Commissioner
Schiffner asked about the proposal brought up at a City Council meeting about the
possibility of this line being discontinued at this point and go into the Outflow Channel.
Community Development Director Leslie detailed Eastern Municipal Water District's
discharge locations, Collier and Nichols in Temescal Wash and the preferred one at
Collier and Wasson Creek, and the inlet /discharge locations of the Outflow Channel, and
stated whether the City will allow discharge into the Lake is another matter.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Schiffner
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Matthies
Nothing to report.
Chairman Wilsey
Asked for status on the sign approved for the Historical Society. Community Development
Director Leslie stated the sign is basically approved for installation. The Historical Society and
Chamber of Commerce cohabit and one reason for the hold -up was City Council reaching an
agreement with the Chamber of Commerce for continued use of the building. Also, the
Historical Society wanted to install the sign on the building, but the decision by staff was for a
freestanding sign. Staff and the Historical Society need to verify the location for the freestanding
sign.
Commissioner Barnes
Absent.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:15 P.M.
AL WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Respectfully Submitted,
1 IR r 11 rm �, ilx4
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Matthies.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, MATTHIES AND
WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie and Associate Planner De Gange.
MINUTE ACTION
Moved by Commissioner Matthies, Seconded by Commissioner Schiffner and carried by a vote
of 4 -0 with Commissioner Barnes abstaining to approve the Minutes of February 5, 1997, as
submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 97 -2 - Bromberger and Bracci
Chairman Wilsey noted that the applicant has withdrawn this application and called for
a motion.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
ACCEPT WITHDRAWAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -2.
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Commercial Project 97 -2 - World Savings
Associate Planner De Gange explained the request is for Design Review of a single -story
3,800 square foot building (World Savings Bank) to be constructed on a 0.63 acre parcel
(Parcel No. 7 of Parcel Map 27659) within the Lake Elsinore City Center. He highlighted
staff's concern with the color scheme and roof tile color proposed. He then stated the
project is generally compatible with the architectural characteristics of the existing and
proposed buildings within the center and match the architecture called out in the Specific
Plan. Staff would recommend the Commission recommend to City Council approval of
Commercial Project 97 -2.
Stephen Shaprio, 1901 Harrison Street, Oakland, questioned condition #10, construction
of a trash enclosure. He explained that individual branches produce a minimal amount
of trash and as a standard the janitorial service removes trash every two days. Mr.
Shaprio then questioned the conditions pertaining to landscaping and stated it is their
desire to meet if not exceed the existing landscaping at the center.
Commissioner Schiffner commented on the color scheme and stated the colors are
compatible. He commented on the trash enclosure and stated the necessity of this
depends on the amount and type of trash generated and would not like this condition
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1997
eliminated, but if in the future there is a problem then one will be required. He then
asked staff to address the landscaping requirements. Associate Planner De Gange referred
to the rendering posted and stated the plan appears to be adequate if not exceeding the
standards; however, the conditions proposed are standard conditions to ensure that the
City's standards are met when formal landscape plans are submitted. Commissioner
Schiffner asked if this explanation satisfies the applicant or if there are other concerns.
Mr. Shaprio stated the standards as addressed are stringent; however, if the center, as it
stands, meets these guidelines then sure we can meet these guidelines as well.
Commissioner Matthies stated concurrence with Commissioner Schiffner on the color
scheme. She then commented on parking and noted that only one handicap parking space
is provided. Mr. Shaprio stated that if Code is not being met he would agree to upgrade.
Commissioner Sands asked if there was an entrance off the courtyard. Mr. Shaprio stated
there was an entrance in the original design; however, this has been eliminated.
Commissioner Sands commented on the potential for robbery and asked staff if too much
landscaping was being required. He suggested staff give consideration to security when
reviewing the landscape plans. Associate Planner De Gange stated a condition could be
added. Commissioner Sands asked about the location, operation and lighting for the
ATM. Mr. Shapiro stated their desire is to have the ATM operational 24 hours and that
Federal regulations have to be met with regard to lighting.
Commissioner Barnes referred to the architectural rendering posted and asked if this is
based on the applicant's proposal or in conformance with the City's conditions, because
this exceeds the City's conditions. Mr. Shapiro stated this is slightly more than they
would like to offer, but would not drastically revise it, and willing to work with the City's
landscape architect to come up with a good final solution the City would be proud of as
well as World Savings.
Chairman Wilsey referred to the concern on security as raised by Commissioner Sands
and suggested condition 17.1. be added to read as follows: "Security aspects of the
landscaping shall be considered when reviewing final landscape plans." He then asked
staff for input on the trash enclosure as this is required per City Code, correct?
Community Development Director Leslie stated the Code requires that trash enclosures
meet certain standards and willing to look at it and talk to the City's Solid Waste
Coordinator.
A brief discussion ensued on the requirement for trash enclosure; the amount of debris
generated by the bank and whether security was the reason for inhouse disposal, and
amending condition 10. Community Development Director Leslie suggested condition
number 10 be amended to read: "If a trash enclosure is required it shall be constructed
per City Standards."
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL PROJECT
97 -2 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING
AMENDMENTS:
Condition No. 10: e T -mst eftelestees shall be ftst eted - City standards as
pfier to is........,.e of Cei ti fieate e f n,.,.......ney. If a trash enclosure
is required it shall be constructed per City Standards.
Condition No. 171 Security aspects of the landscaping shall be considered when
reviewing final landscape plans.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1997
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
AT 7:21 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 7:36 P.M.
INFORMATIONAL
3. R 91 -6 Amendment #2 - Centex Homes
Community Development Director Leslie stated the Staff Report will stand for itself. He
then explained the presentation made in February 1996 does not reflect the current
operation and this being the reason for bringing this matter before the Commission as an
Informational Item. He stated he would answer any questions and noted that Mr. Jim
Bolton of Centex Homes was in the audience.
Chairman Wilsey referred to the new models and asked how many are to be built. Mr.
Bolton stated there are approximately 65 more lots to build on. Chairman Wilsey stated
when we get to this point then Centex is finished for all practical purposes. Mr. Bolton
stated this is correct. Chairman Wilsey asked about the exterior features and square
footage for Spinnaker Point and Mariner's Ridge. Mr. Bolton stated the Mariner's Ridge
models are slightly larger than the Spinnaker Point models and the exterior features are
similar the only difference is the footprint of the house. It was our intention to have both
models offered and it wasn't until 4 -5 months later that we decided to go with the
Mariner's Ridge model. Chairman Wilsey asked about the parking facilities - -the parking
facilities have been taken out and no parking facilities other than handicap parking across
the street. Mr. Bolton stated this is correct, there is street parking for prospective buyers
and there is one off - street handicap parking space, and from what I have seen this is
adequate parking. Community Development Director stated the parking area is delineated
on the street and the models are located on a cul -de -sac and there are no other homes on
this street. In this instance, there is not a concern with the lack of parking because on
street parking will probably be sufficient.
Commissioner Schiffner asked how many elevations were eliminated, concern is
aesthetics. Mr. Bolton stated that each model had three different elevations and explained
the transition from Spinnaker Point to Mariner's Ridge.
Chairman Wilsey asked about sales. Mr. Bolton stated they are not breaking any record,
but sell one home a week. Commissioner Schiffner commented on the economics of the
new model and asked whether these savings were visual from the exterior, again concern
is aesthetics. Mr. Bolton stated there are many different parts where something can be
built more economically -- things you can't see such as structure, but the amenities are
similar to the previous model.
Commissioner Sands asked staff whether they feel the quality and diversity of the new
models will be compromised. Community Development Director Leslie responded in the
negative and stated there will be less diversity in the amount of models; however, with
what was proposed a year ago the amount of models being built was quite high compared
to typical developments.
Commissioner Barnes stated for the record that he has no comments or questions.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the three models (Mariner's Ridge)
currently being constructed are in substantial conformance with what was approved as
part of Amendment #2 of R 91 -6, and gave staff the authority to approve the project
administratively.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1997
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie informed the Commission of the following:
March 5, 1997, Planning Commission/DRC Meeting is being called for lack of
items.
2. Scheduled for the Planning Commission Meeting of March 19, 1997 are plans for
El Pollo Loco and Arco AM/PM.
Commissioner Schiffner asked for the status on the Arco AM/PM at Four Corners. Community
Development Director Leslie stated the applicant has indicated he would start anytime.
Commissioner Schiffner then asked for the status on the water park. Community Development
Director Leslie stated they have opened an office in Shoppers Square II on Casino Drive and
their financing is supposed to be coming in anytime.
Commissioner Barnes asked about the construction occurring at Elsinore City Center.
Community Development Director Leslie explained this strip of stores was approved with the
Wa1Mart and building was postponed until tenants were lined -up.
Commissioner Wilsey asked for the status on the raceway. Community Development Director
Leslie stated a meeting was held last week with representatives of the property owner. The plan
was originally to build a dedicated road course with the intent of some day having Formula One
races. Their marketing people are telling them this may be a dream way down the road, and to
make a go of it they probably need to build a bigger oval. Now, they are looking at building a
bigger oval and integrating with a road course, and this has required them to go back and redo
their plans. Also, they have run into some resistance from the various resource regulatory
agencies.
Commissioner Schiffner asked about the market proposed at Four Comers. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that he would have to research and report back. However,
the last information received on the one proposed behind the Chevron station is that our general
earthquake fault maps show earthquake faults in the area and this means that more precise studies
need to be done, and they were going to do that, but it has been some time.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Schiffner
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Matthies
Nothing to report.
Chairman Wilsey
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Barnes
Nothing to report.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1997
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY BARNES, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:09 P.M.
AL WILSEY, CHAIRM
Respectfully Submitted,
Lmda Grmdsta f
Recording Secretary
1-3-1 Q111"wall
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 5, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 5, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
41 n �
Linda Grmdstpe
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
MARCH 19, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 19, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
Respectfully submitted,
/ %�L�
inda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 1997
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, MATTHIES AND
WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie and Associate Planners De Gange
and Villa, and City Engineer O'Donnell.
MINUTE ACTION
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Matthies and carried by a vote
of 5 -0 to approve the Minutes of February 19, 1997, March 5, 1997, and March 19, 1997 as
submitted.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Parcel Map 28524, Variance 97 -2, Commercial Proiect 97 -1, Conditional Use
Permit 97 -1, Variance 97 -1 - Marko Botich (Pami Randhawa)
Associate Planner Villa explained the project entails development of a 3.70 acre parcel
at the southeast corner of Nichols Road and Collier Avenue. Tentative Parcel Map
28524 is for the subdivision of 3.70 acres into 3 lots. Variance 97 -2 is to allow a
reduction in minimum street frontage requirements for proposed Parcel 2 of TPM
28524. Design Review for the proposed AM/PM gasoline dispensing establishment with
six mechanical gasoline pump dispensers under a 3,135 square foot, 21 foot high
canopy, and a 3,700 square foot mini -mart to provide 24 -hour retail sales, and a small
scale indoor fast -food restaurant with a drive -thru window, and the overall design of
the site plan for the entire development. Conditional Use Permit 97 -1 is to allow a
gasoline dispensing establishment with an AM/PM food -mart on Parcel 1; allow the
establishment of a drive - through at the proposed AM/PM on Parcel 1, and a drive -
through at the proposed fast food restaurant on Parcel 2, and; allow the sale of alcohol
beverages (beer and wine) at the proposed AM/PM food -mart, pursuant to Section CH
Zoning (Commercial Highway) of the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. Variance 97 -1 is
to allow reduction in setback for the gasoline pumps and pump islands and canopy in
accordance with Section 17.38.090.11 & .0 of the Municipal Code and as directed by
the Development Standards of the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan. Staff recommends
approval of the project.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Mr. Marko Botich, 6 Upper Newport Plaza, Newport Beach, representing the
applicant, Pami Randhawa, stated they have met with staff and agrees with the
conditions stated, but have some concerns. Mr. Botich then questioned the benefit
assessment district, understands there is no benefit assessment district at this time, nor
a time frame for the improvements or documents to show what improvements are
expected. He explained the concern is contributing money at the time of issuance
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
a building permit for something they don't know much about. He stated the method
is acceptable, our project will contribute some traffic increase, and the formula is fine
but questioned the amount, $20,000.00 for the traffic signal and $48,000.00 for
widening of the bridge and its ancillary construction uses, and stated they don't want
to pay any more or any less than their fair share. Mr. Botich stated the $68,000.00
contribution of funds will be a burden on the developer who is developing one parcel,
as the other parcels will not be developed until the proper tenants are found. Mr.
Botich stated they feel the payment should be made on an incremental basis
considering the weighted value of each parcel against the responsibility of the
assessment on the 3.39 acres and these funds, which would put our payment at about
$28,000.00, placed into an interest- bearing account for three years naming the City and
Mr. Randhawa's partnership as benefactors of that account, and the interest accrued
to Mr. Randhawa.
Mr. Botich stated condition 36, all Public Works requirements to be complied with, is
a catch all condition and concerned with that. He asked for discussion on condition 20
with regard to the Master Planned Drainage Fees and stated they need to know what
the Master Plan is and what area of impact it includes before they can agree to this
condition. Mr. Botich stated that he would answer any questions that may arise.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none,
the public hearing was closed at 7:21 p.m.
Chairman Wilsey asked staff to address the concerns raised by Mr. Botich.
Community Development Director Leslie explained there are two sets of conditions.
The CUP /Commercial Project has 37 conditions and the Parcel Map has 29 conditions.
The conditions relative to the assessment district are 27 and 28 of the Parcel Map. The
condition requiring all Public Works requirements to be complied with is contained in
both sets of conditions, condition 36 and condition 2. The Master Plan Drainage Fee
is condition 20 of the Parcel Map.
Community Development Director Leslie then explained the General Plan classification
for Nichols Road and the freeway overpass layout at buildout and noted that
participation in the benefit assessment district is to mitigate the impacts of the projects
being proposed in this area. He explained the difficulty in establishing a benefit
assessment district being the need of agreement from all property owners, and
highlighted future participants of this benefit assessment district and explained the
contribution is based on a prorata share of the traffic contributed to the interchange
or onto the overpass. He explained that rough schematics were done on the
interchange, and to try to keep costs down looking at a five -lane overpass as opposed
to six lanes. Also, a preliminary cost estimate was put together on the schematics, the
estimate is a little under four million dollars, and staff reviewed and feels the estimate
is probably low, but due to the lack of anything better at this time this is what we are
using. He stated a certain amount of traffic contribution to the interchange will not be
from new developments but from existing developments and do not foresee collecting
fees from those developments or the property owners agreeing to be part of an
assessment district. So, other sources of funding for this project will have to be secured,
these sources may include gas tax monies, Measure A funds, or Federal funds, if still
available. Staff feels it necessary to recommend these projects put up some money now
in order to make a finding that the traffic impacts expected are going to be mitigated.
These funds will be placed into a segregated account, as required by State Law. Also,
if these funds have not been committed within five years after receipt then they have
to be refunded or findings made as to why the funds should remain on account. He
further explained the applicant's percentage being 1.2 percent of the average daily trips
on the overpass at buildout. Staff is willing to sit down with the applicant and go
through the numbers and if there is an error will adjust the numbers accordingly.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
Commissioner Schiffner asked if there was a legal reason the applicant's proposed
method could not be used. Community Development Director Leslie explained the
funds are placed into segregated account at the City, as opposed to a separate account
under the applicant's name. Any refundable fees are required to be refunded with
interest by State Law. However, these fees are not necessarily refundable because they
are taken in for the purpose of improving the interchange in the future. If after five
years a finding cannot be made to retain the funds and they are refunded whether they
are refunded with interest is a question unanswered, will have to check with our legal
people.
Chairman Wilsey suggested continuing with the other concerns and developing
verbiage that can be added to the conditions that would allow input between staff and
the developer prior to going before City Council. Community Development Director
Leslie stated as far as distributing payment of the fee throughout the project staff has
no problem with that; however, in their letter the applicant suggested prorating the fee
over the project based on the size of the parcels. Staff would suggest it be prorated over
the project based on trip-generation on the various components of the project, and to
say impacts are mitigated on each use it has to be based on traffic generation not lot
size. Chairman Wilsey asked if this would hold true to condition 28, contributing funds
toward traffic signal. Community Development Director Leslie responded in the
affirmative.
Commissioner Schiffner stated in light of Mr. Leslie's explanation and the possibility
of accepting fees on a traffic prorated basis, whether this does not mitigate some of the
applicant's problems. Mr. Botich stated they did not have a problem with applying
language to the condition to work with staff. The issue will be whether it can be paid
incrementally, debate the interpretation of the traffic study and the money placed into
an interest- bearing account. Mr. Botich stated they agree the contributory share would
be based on the traffic generated and the additional traffic the project is putting onto
the streets, this is our disagreement with the figures given us, the difference between
the 44 %. We think it is more like 35 %.
Commissioner Schiffner asked about the street improvements expected as part of this
project. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that all frontage improvements along the
right -of -way curb, gutter, sidewalk and paving to existing pavement are expected.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if this was to the existing alignment, and anticipating
they are going to change the alignment and that Parcel 3 will increase in size due to the
possible realignment of Collier Avenue all of this will be redone at that time, correct?
City Engineer O'Donnell stated the street improvements on Nichols may not be affected
but the street improvements on Collier may be affected. Commissioner Schiffner asked
if there would be significant changes in the grade at the end of Nichols when Collier is
realigned. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that designs have not been done and will
have to look into what grades will take place.
Discussion ensued on street improvements expected and the possibility that they will
have to be redone with the realignment and the realignment being a City project.
Chairman Wilsey asked the applicant if condition 36 has been adequately addressed.
Mr. Botich stated their question was whether they had to do it twice, and our thought
was to put in temporary improvements and not put in sidewalks, etc., or if permanent
is put in and it has to be changed then we would not have to pay for any of the new
improvements. Commissioner Schiffner stated these improvements are so far into the
future that temporary improvements would not be acceptable in the interim. Mr.
Botich asked if the widening of Nichols Road would be part of the assessment and
whether there would be a credit or refund if permanent improvements were installed.
Commissioner Schiffner stated this has already been answered in that the grades that
are there now are not going to be acceptable and it is pretty much a foregone
conclusion that those improvements are going to be replaced and this will be covered
with widening of the road. City Engineer O'Donnell explained that the improvements
to be installed were deducted when
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
figuring the applicant's contribution percentage, so they are not paying twice. He
explained that the grade to the bridge will not change and does not see a lot happening
on Nichols.
Commissioner Matthies stated her concerns have been answered. She then commented
on condition 6 of C 97 -1 /CUP 97 -1, and assumes there is no problem with landscaping
and irrigating all areas or pads graded, during the grading operation, if building
permits are not issued within 90 days. Mr. Botich stated they do not have a problem
with this.
Commissioner Barnes stated his concerns have been answered, and the applicant can
work with staff on the questions /problems they are having with the conditions.
Commissioner Sands asked how many developers at present are participating in the
benefit assessment district. Community Development Director Leslie stated this started
with the outlet center, and then this project and staff has spoken with the Alberhill
Raceway people. Commissioner Sands asked about the time frame between issuance
of building permit and contribution. Community Development Director Leslie stated
that deposit of the contribution would be required at building permit. Commissioner
Sands inquired about the time frame for issuance of building permits. Mr. Botich
stated Arco uses a standard plan and working drawings can be done in 30 days so plans
could be in plan check in 30 -60 days.
Chairman Wilsey asked what products are to be dispensed through the drive- through
window, food only? Concern would be dispensing of alcoholic beverages. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that condition 7 of C 97 -1 /CUP 97 -1 could be
amended to stipulated that no alcoholic beverages shall be dispensed through the drive -
through window. Chairman Wilsey then asked staff to address the concern raised on
condition 20, pertaining to the Master Planed Drainage Fees. City Engineer O'Donnell
explained the Master Planned Drainage Fee was adopted by City Council based on a
per acreage fee and this area would be approximately $2,500.00 an acre. The only way
the applicant can be exempt is to request this from City Council. Mr. O'Donnell
further explained that the condition was designed to give the applicant some
benefit/relief due to the facilities constructed by the Redevelopment Agency.
Chairman Wilsey asked staff for the suggested verbiage on condition 27 and 28 of the
Parcel Map. Community Development Director Leslie suggested that as part of the
motion the Commission instruct staff to meet with the applicant prior to the City
Council meeting and go over the percentages and the traffic study numbers and present
set numbers for both condition 27 and 28 to City Council. He then suggested the
following wording relative to the incremental payment of the fee be added to the last
sentence of both conditions "the applicant shall make contributions at issuance of
building permits incrementally based on traffic generation for the building use that a
permit is being issued for at that particular time."
Mr. Botich suggested using a performance material and labor bond for a period of
three or five years. Chairman Wilsey stated the approval may require the applicant
and staff to work out an agreement prior to City Council meeting. Community
Development Director Leslie stated as normal policy bonds are not taken for this and
does not feel it can be negotiated and it may have to be addressed by City Council.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -1, VARIANCE 97 -1, VARIANCE 97 -2
AND TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL BASED ON THE
FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN
THE STAFF REPORT OF COMMERCIAL PROJECT 97 -1 WITH AMENDMENT
TO CONDITION NUMBER 7 THAT NO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES SHALL BE
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
SOLD THROUGH THE DRIVE- THROUGH AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 28524 WITH AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 27 AND CONDITION
28 THAT INDICATES THE FINAL NUMBERS WILL BE DETERMINED PRIOR
TO CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION BY THE DEVELOPER AND STAFF AND
THE CONTRIBUTIONS PRORATED BASED ON THE TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION
BY THE VARIOUS USES AS PERTAINNG TO THE BUILDING PERMITS THAT
ARE ISSUED.
Condition 7 of C 97 -1: The approval for the sale of alcohol shall be limited to the
sale of beer and wine only. No general (distilled) alcoholic
beverage sales. No alcoholic beverages shall be dispensed
or sold through the drive - through window.
Condition 27 of PM 28524: A benefit assessment district is planned in this area for the
purposes of improving the interchange at I -15 and Nichols
Road. If a benefit assessment district has not been formed
at time of building permit for this project, the applicant
shall contribute $48,000 toward these improvements based
on the prorata fair share for the development's increment
increase in the traffic. The applicant shall make
contributions at issuance of building permits
incrementally, based on traffic generation for the building
use that a permit is being issued for at that particular
time. Staff is to meet with the applicant prior to City
Council consideration and the final numbers are to be
determined and presented to City Council and the
contribution prorated based on the traffic contribution by
the various parcels as pertaining to the building permits
that are issued.
Condition 28 of PM 28524: Developer shall contribute $20,000 toward the design and
construction of a traffic signal at Collier Ave. and Nichols
Road. The contribution is limited to the prorata fair
share for the development's increment increase in the
traffic. The applicant shall make contributions at
issuance of building permits incrementally based on traffic
generation for the building use that a permit is being
issued for at that particular time. Staff is to meet with the
applicant prior to City Council consideration and the final
numbers are to be determined and presented to City
Council and the contribution prorated based on the traffic
contribution by the various parcels as pertaining to the
building permits that are issued.
At this time, 8:20 p.m. the Planning Commission recessed.
At this time, 8:28 p.m. the Planning Commission reconvened.
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Commercial Project 97 -3 - Oak Grove Equities
Associate Planner Villa explained the request is for Design Review and site plan design
of a 2,680 square foot fast food restaurant with drive through window (El Polio Loco)
to be constructed on approximately .48 acres (Parcel 6) within the Lake Elsinore City
Center at Grape Street and Railroad Canyon Road. He highlighted staffs concern on
the color scheme. He then stated the project is generally consistent with the center and
staff recommends approval of the project.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone wishing to speak on the matter.
Mr. Craig Schleuniger, representing Oak Grove Equities, stated his only concern is the
color scheme, condition 4. He then explained the colors proposed are signature colors
for El Polio Loco and would like to retain this color scheme.
Commissioner Barnes asked the applicant if the project would be abandoned if the
corporate colors are not approved. Mr. Dennis Malone, representing Highgrove
Restaurants, stated they are not saying the project would be abandoned, but would
have to obtain approval from El Polio Loco to change the colors and cannot say at this
point whether they would approve or not.
Commissioner Sands asked if there was a dividing wall between El Polio Loco and
World Savings. Community Development Director Leslie stated the plans do not reflect
a dividing wall, there could be a mow strip otherwise the landscaping would blend
together.
Commissioner Schiffner stated the colors should conform with the existing color
scheme.
Commissioner Matthies stated concurrence with Commissioner Schiffner. Concern is
with the color scheme and asked if red color could be toned down.
Mr. Malone asked if the concerns would be satisfied if El Polio Loco Corporate
approves the change in color from Ruby Red to Tomato Bisque, and that he could
contact the corporate office tomorrow and get an answer to this question and then
contact staff.
Commissioner Schiffner suggested the Commission take action on the project and let
staff work with the applicant on the color scheme.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL PROJECT
97 -3 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH AMENDMENT TO
CONDITION 4.
Condition No. 4 Materials depicted on the elevations shall be used unless modified
by these conditions, Community Development Director or his
designee. eolms shall be changed to include Tomato Bisque;
r-..f ......... ................ ........ .... _....,.... .,...,._ .,., ......b .. --.. , f o Staff is to
work with the applicant and develop a suitable alternative to the
strict corporate colors of El Polio Loco. The final color scheme
shall be consistent with the approved color for the center with
some variation and subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director or designee.
PAGE SEVEN - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MARCH 26, 1997
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
AT 8:39 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 9:00 P.M.
INFORMATIONAL
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie informed the Commission that the City Manager and
John De Gange have tendered their resignation. The Commissioners wished John the best
of luck.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
No comments.
Commissioner Schiffner
No comments.
Commissioner Matthies
No comments.
Chairman Wilsey
No comments.
Commissioner Barnes
No comments.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY BARNES, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 9:04 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 2, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 2, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
finda Grindsta
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 16, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 16, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
inda Grinds aff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Sands.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, SCHIFFNER AND WILSEY
0-0 D`I k1WX1Ju 11.Xy [�J�I D '�Y�:T \:7�1 \i!I�u /:YY_Y_'._[I_ 7
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie and Associate Planner Villa.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Schiffner and carried by a vote
of 3 -0 with Commissioners Barnes and Matthies absent to approve the Consent Calendar
as presented.
1. The following Minutes were approved.
a. Planning Commission Special Meeting - March 26, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - April 02, 1997
C. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - April 16, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 97 -4 - Bread of Life Fellowship (Philip Saenz)
Associate Planner Villa explained the request is for Bread of Life Fellowship Church
to operate religious operations within an existing building within Planning Area 1
of the Historic Elsinore Overlay District, (formerly First Trust Bank) at 201 North
Main Street and to allow shared parking within the center, the adjacent market. He
explained the church would use the facility for general church worship and bible
study. Typical hours of operation would be 10:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. for Sunday
meetings, 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Tuesday, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday
for bible study. He highlighted staff's concern with parking and stated this has been
addressed with the agreement reached with the adjacent market to utilize the 83
parking spaces. Staff recommends approval.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. asking for those wishing
to speak on the matter. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at 7:04.
Commissioner Sands stated he reviewed the petition and has no questions.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he sees no problem.
Chairman Wilsey stated that anytime we can get another church in the community
so much the better.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -4 BASED ON THE FINDINGS,
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 7, 1997
EXHIBIT A & B AND SUBJECT TO THE 9 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT
BUSINESS ITEMS
NONE
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE AT 7:05 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 7:36 P.M.
STAFF COMMENTS
Nothing to report.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
No comments.
Commissioner Schiffner
Asked staff to provided status on the following:
1. Grading occurring on the property south of the Vons market.
Community Development Director Leslie explained the area south of the Vons
market is part of the Elsinore City Center. Grading of the Vons and Wal -Mart site
generated a lot of export dirt that could not be disposed of expeditiously and it was
stock piled on this portion of the site. Mr. Schleuniger has entered into an
agreement with a construction materials' dealer and this export material is being
made into construction material and being sold. Also, Mr. Schleuniger has inquired
about possible uses for this site.
2. Property south of Paradise Chevrolet, grading occurring.
Community Development Director Leslie explained the grading that is occurring on
the site and stated that Mr. Gregory may want to develop this 4 -acre site, or sell it
to another auto dealership. He then stated staff has received a General Plan
Amendment application for the 18 acres on Franklin Street, across from the Rodeo
Grounds, to change the designation from Multi - Family Residential to Commercial,
and they have mentioned an auto dealership.
Commissioner Sands asked about the compacting of dirt between Casino and Avenue
12. Community Development Director Leslie explained that USA Properties and
Paradise Chevrolet are utilizing the same grading contractor, and stated the dirt is
coming from the USA site onto this site, and highlighted the problems staff has
experienced with this grading contractor. Staff has issued several stop work orders
and will issue another one tomorrow morning.
3. Market proposed at Four Corners.
Community Development Director Leslie stated staff has received a General Plan
Amendment application to change the designation for the site (behind Chevron
station) from Future Specific Plan Area to General Commercial to allow a market.
Pursuant to a conversation with the developer they expect to submit full
architectural plans, site
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 7, 1997
plan and traffic study next week. Chairman Wilsey asked about the traffic on
Highway 74, going over the mountain, and how this will be dealt with. Community
Development Director Leslie stated the traffic study will have to address the traffic
on Highway 74, and the applicant's traffic engineer has suggested a traffic signal at
the entrance; however, staff believes that Caltrans will not approve this. Chairman
Wilsey asked about the realignment of Highway 74. Community Development
Director Leslie stated that Caltrans is looking at an alternate route for Highway 74
and would like to turn Riverside Drive (Highway 74) over to the City, but the City
is resisting.
Chairman Wilsev
Commented on the Lincoln Street traffic speed (50 -60 mph), and stated there have been two
accidents and numerous near accidents as traffic comes down the hill from Grand Avenue.
Asked that Engineering staff check into the possibility of putting one or two stop signs on
Lincoln Street. Community Development Director Leslie stated staff can review and
explained there are guidelines for establishing stop signs and warrants required.
Commissioner Barnes
Absent
Commissioner Matthies
Absent
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 8:08 P.M.
A
AL WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Respectfully Submitted,
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schiffner.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, AND WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MATTHIES
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa, Senior
Planner Morita, and City Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
Moved by Commissioner Schiffner, Seconded by Commissioner Sands and carried by a vote of
3 -0 with Commissioners Bames abstaining and Commissioner Matthies absent to approve the
Consent Calendar as presented.
The following Minutes were approved.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - May 7, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Specific Plan 89 -2 Amendment #3 - Kenneth Smith c/o Horizon
Senior Planner Morita stated that Specific Plan Amendment No. 3 is for the expansion
of the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center located in the northern portion of the City, consisting
of 202 -acres in the eastern portion of the Alberhill Ranch Specific Plan, east of I -15 and
bisected by Nichols Road. Mr. Morita provided a brief history on the Alberhill Ranch
Specific Plan approved in 1989, and the subsequent amendments approved. Mr. Morita
explained that Amendment No. 3 supersedes development and design standards and other
utility plans originally approved for the Alberbill Ranch Specific Plan. Mr. Morita then
presented slides and gave an overview of Planning Area "A ", 120 -acre area consisting of
the hillside portions of the Specific Plan Amendment No. 3 area located north of Nichols
Road, with no development proposed within this area; Planning Area "B ", 32 -acre area
located south and west of Planning Area "A" and north of Nichols Road and is designated
as C -SP, Commercial- Specific Plan, and intended to accommodate mixed use development
with a freeway orientation, with approximately 340,000 square feet of general commercial
uses; Planning Area "C ", 50 -acre area located south of Nichols Road and designated C-
SP, Commercial- Specific Plan, this area is intended to be developed with regional general
commercial uses to provide 380,000 square feet of gross building area.
Commissioner Sands asked about location of the slopes within Planning Area "C ". Mr.
Morita detailed the slopes within Planning Area "C ".
Mr. Morita referred to the issues listed in the Staff Report and stated that all issues have
been resolved. He then highlighted the issues relating project improvements to Nichols
Road, Nichols Road interchange and realignment. Mr. Morita stated that staff finds the
project a benefit and asset to the City and recommends the Planning Commission
recommend to City Council approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration 97 -3 and SP 89 -2
Amendment No. 3 by adoption of Resolution No. 97 -2.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 21, 1997
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Mr. Kenneth Smith, Horizon Group, Inc., provided a brief history on the industry and
explained that originally the outlet center was master planned at 250,000 square feet.
This plan was amended to add 100,000 square feet so the center now totals 350,000
square feet. At the time the fourth phase was under construction other centers around the
country were approaching 600,000 and 700,000 square feet so we began looking to
expand this center, Lake Elsinore Outlet Center being one of the more successful center
in our portfolio. Mr. Smith explained that the south side of Nichols Road has been
master planned for doubling of the outlet center and on the north side would like to have
an entertainment theme, compatible uses. Mr. Smith stated the architecture for the
expansion is similar to the existing center and considered an upgrade in the amount of
architectural articulation over the first phases. Mr. Smith then stated that he would
answer any questions.
Mr. Dan Kipper, KCT Consultants, 4371 Latham Street, Suite 103, Riverside, engineers
for the project, stated he would answer any questions that arise. Mr. Kipper stated for
clarification the slopes questioned earlier are two little knobs in Planning Area "C" that
will be graded out and the remaining portion of the hillside preserved. Mr. Kipper then
thanked staff for their cooperation.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter.
Ms. Donna Lucas, 12435 Beardsley Road, Corona, asked why the expansion was detached
from the original facility, assumes there is insufficient land. Ms. Lucas then asked if
there will be a shuttle system between the facilities.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none,
the public hearing was closed at 7:13 p.m.
Commissioner Barnes referred to the Nichols Road realignment and asked if it will
require obtaining any County property. Mr. Kipper stated the only right -of -way
anticipated is in a later phase and that would probably be on the north side of Nichols
Road at the east line of the property boundary where slopes may encroach onto private
property. Presently, there is existing right -of -way east of the project sufficient for the
paving transition designed. Commissioner Barnes asked if the property line at Wood
Mesa Court was not also the City /County boundary line. Community Development
Director Leslie responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Barnes then inquired about
the improvements for Wood Mesa Court being asphalt rather than standard concrete,
condition number 31. Community Development Director Leslie stated the objective was
to try to match the County's standard. Mr. Kipper explained the existing cul -de -sac was
installed about 10 years ago using the County standard, and the goal was to match the the
street and install similar improvements, and then on -site there will be a berm and
landscaping that buffers that street from the project. Commissioner Barnes asked if the
3 -foot is all the City would have to maintain. Community Development Director Leslie
stated staff is working with the County on an agreement to eliminate the problem with
half maintenance, and explained the City will maintain a street that is split down the
middle and the County will maintain another. Commissioner Barnes suggested this be
pursued because AC dikes are not maintenance free. Commissioner Barnes asked for
additional information on the realignment of Highway 74, Staff Report Page 9, item 10.
Senior Planner Morita stated that staff met with Caltrans and discussed the issues of the
realignment; however, Caltrans nor the City has determined where and /or how the
realigned would connect.
Commissioner Sands commented on the statement that all land use issues have been
resolved. He then asked if there are any streets or alleyways that will be vacated. Mr.
Kipper responded in the negative and stated the only vacation they are aware of is the
present existing alignment of Nichols Road through the project, and this was recorded
with the Financing Parcel Map 5 -10 years ago. Commissioner Sands then inquired about
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 21, 1997
the priority of the Planning Areas and whether Planning Area "C" overrules Planning
Area 'B ". Mr. Smith stated it is planned that Planning Area "C" would be the first to be
developed; however, the document is written so that this is not necessarily the case.
Mr. Smith stated he would like to address the comments made earlier by Ms. Lucas. Mr.
Smith stated there will be a shuttle service between the facilities and that there was
insufficient ground adjacent to the existing outlet center for the expansion.
Commissioner Schiffner asked what is to be constructed in the roadway on the first phase.
Mr. Kipper stated the first phase as envisioned would be Planning Area "C" and the road
improvements proposed would be four lanes of pavement on Nichols Road, to the south
side of Nichols adjacent to that phase, together with curb, gutter and paving. The plan
also calls for traffic signals to be placed at the on/off ramps at I -15 and Nichols. The
paving along the first phase of Planning Area "C" would be standard over to the east end
of the project, paving only, and make a smooth connection to the County roadway.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if the south half of the median island would be constructed
at this time. Mr. Kipper responded in the negative and explained that splitting the traffic
with a half median is difficult and sometimes dangerous so we have elected to postpone
the median to a later phase when we can put the paving in to support it. Commissioner
Schiffner referred to the deposit for widening of the bridge and asked if this will be
charged or credited against the three million dollars the City is participating in.
Community Development Director Leslie stated that contribution through a benefit
assessment district was not contemplated with the agreement they have regarding the three
million dollars, so this is separate.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. 97 -3 AND SP 89 -2 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE
ALBERHILL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND
SUBJECT TO THE 13 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF
REPORT.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BARNES, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 97 -2, ENTITLED AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO THE ALBERHILL RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 97 -3 FOR THE
LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTER EXPANSION
(HORIZON)
At this time, 7:32 p.m., the Planning Commission recessed.
At this time, 7:34 p.m., the Planning Commission reconvened.
3. Tentative Parcel Man 28552 - MCE Consultants (Paradise Chevrolet)
Associate Planner Villa explained the request is to subdivide a 10 -acre parcel formed as
a result of Lot Line Adjustment 96 -4. The subdivision will create two parcels with
proposed Parcel No. 1 being 6 gross acres and Parcel No. 2 being 4 gross acres, at 31400
Casino Drive between Diamond Drive and Franklin Street. This 10 -acre parcel is
currently being graded for the construction of Lake Chevrolet auto dealership recently
approved. Lake Chevrolet will be constructed on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 will be graded
for a future auto dealership. The proposed subdivision meets all development
requirements and is consistent with the Canyon Creek Specific Plan and Municipal Code,
therefore staff recommends approval.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 21, 1997
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Mr. Richard Moore, MCE Consultants, stated that he would answer any questions, and
that they have no problem with the Conditions of Approval.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none,
the public hearing was closed at 7:38 p.m.
There being no discussion at the table, Chairman Wilsey called for a motion.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
28552, BASED ON THE FINDINGS, EXHIBIT A, AND SUBJECT TO THE 16
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
BUSINESS ITEMS
NONE
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
AT 7:39 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 8:00 P.M.
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie stated he had no comment.
Associate Planner Villa stated that Mr. Preston Smith was contacted regarding the golf driving
range proposed at the northwest comer of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive. Mr. Smith
indicated that financing was an issue and once this is resolved he planned to go forward with the
project.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Barnes
Asked staff for the status on El Pollo Loco and World Savings at Elsinore City Center.
Associate Planner Villa stated that both El Pollo Loco and World Savings have submitted plans
for plan check so within two or three months you will see activity.
Commissioner Schiffner
Asked staff for the status of the Arco station proposed at Nichols Road. Associate Planner Villa
stated that plans have not yet been submitted for plan check.
Commissioner Wilsey asked if the funding issues have been resolved, interest on the deposit
going back to the applicant. Community Development Director Leslie stated that staff and the
applicant met prior to the proposal going to City Council and there was an agreement worked
out at Council. Commissioner Wilsey asked that information on the funding issues be brought
to Planning Commission at a future meeting.
Commissioner Sands
Asked staff for the status on the water park. Community Development Director Leslie stated
staff could not provide an update as nothing has been heard lately.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - MAY 21, 1997
Chairman Wilsey
No comment.
Commissioner Matthies
Absent.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 8:05 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
L' dC dsta;�
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 4, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 4, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, MATTHIES AND
WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa, and City
Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Barnes and carried by a vote of 4 -0
with Commissioner Matthies abstaining to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
1. The following Minutes were approved.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - May 21, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - June 4, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. General Plan Amendment 97 -2 and Commercial Project 97 -5 - Albertson (Continued
from June 4, 1997)
Associate Planner Villa explained that the request is for a General Plan Amendment to
change the General Plan Land Use Designation for approximately 7.5 acres located on the
northwest corner of Lakeshore and Riverside Drives (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 378 -290-
005, 378 - 290 -019, 378 - 290 -021, 378 - 290 -022, and 378 - 290 -023) from Future Specific
Plan Area "J" to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). He explained that the NC Designation
would be consistent with the project site's underlying Zoning Classification of C -1
(Neighborhood Commercial), and Design Review for the development of a 48,130 square
foot Albertson Supermarket on 5.37 acres (Assessor's Parcel Number 378 - 290 -022). He
stated that the building has been designed with a Nautical /Cape Cod design theme as
required by the Community Design Element of the General Plan and the circulation,
parking and other site plan standards have been met with the exception of signage.
Associate Planner Villa stated that project issues /concerns have been addressed in the
Staff Report and conditioned accordingly. He then referred to the memorandum dated
June 18, 1997, requesting amendment to the Condition of Approval and stated Staff
recommends the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of Mitigated
Negative Declaration 97 -4, General Plan Amendment 97 -2 and Commercial Project No.
97 -5 based on the Findings, Exhibits "A" thm "F" and subject to the Conditions of
Approval as amended.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
Tom Courtney, Courtney Architects, 656 Santa Rosa Street, San Luis Obispo, introduced
Scott Thayer of Albertsons, Glenn Holes of Pefiler and Associates, civil engineers for the
project and Ken Andrew of Studio Five, landscape architect for the project, and stated
these people will answer any questions the Commission might have. Mr. Courtney stated
they concur with most of the conditions. He then commented on condition number 3,
pertaining to the redesign of the side elevations, and stated that plans have been
resubmitted and explained the architectural enhancements proposed. Mr. Courtney
addressed Condition number 3.a., pertaining to placement of barriers to prevent
unauthorized access and referred to the site plan and explained that a masonry wall was
built 2 feet 10 inches to the face on the adjoining property and this will create a gap
because it is so far back and our building had to be placed 8 inches off the property line.
He noted that the request here, is for the applicant to go onto adjoining property and
explained that they cannot build things on adjoining property. Mr. Courtney suggested
that perhaps the adjoining property owner could build a grill type fence coming off the
wall up to the property line and they could do the same thing, to meet at the property
line, and requested consideration be given. He further noted Condition number 27,
pertaining to vending machines, tables, kid's rides, newspaper racks, telephones and
similar devices, being concealed from view. Mr. Courtney explained these types of items
are usually placed under the canopy and believes this is a good solution and asked staff
if this was acceptable; Condition number 28, refers to fencing along property lines being
decorative block wall or wrought iron. Mr. Courtney explained the grades and stated it
would be difficult to construct because of the undulation of grades and requested deletion
of this condition.
Ken Andrew, Studio Five, 6 Morgan, Suite 114, Irvine, stated that one intention with the
landscape plan was to try to meet all the criteria received from Planning, part of which
was meeting water conservation requirements and not impede the line of sight in front,
coming down the roads.
Glenn Holmes, Pefiler and Associates, civil engineers for the project, referred to the
memorandum of June 18, and questioned Condition Number 41. He noted that the City
shall bear no costs for installation, operation and maintenance of the signal and warning
beacons planned on Riverside Drive. Obviously, the applicant will bear all the costs
associated with the installation/design of the signal, but he wanted to verify the
operation/maintenance of the signal and whether this will be borne by Cal -Trans, or
whether the ongoing operation/maintenance will be subject to inclusion into a Lighting
and Landscaping Maintenance District (LLMD) in which the applicant would participate.
Chairman Wilsey stated this will be brought up for further discussion. Mr. Holmes stated
they have been working with Cal -Trans and Cal -Trans has issued a letter to the City and
one of the comments was the reduction of the width of the driveway on Riverside Drive,
49 to 45 feet. Cal -Trans will be issuing a letter to the City granting their approval of the
driveway up to 50 feet in width and this letter is forthcoming.
Scott Thayer, Real Estate Manager for Albertson, 1180 West Lambert Road, Brea,
thanked staff for their hard work. Mr. Thayer stated that he would answer any question
the Commission might have.
Jim Bolton, 1480 Amorose Street, Lake Elsinore, stated that he was asked to review the
traffic report for this project, mainly access into the site. Mr. Bolton stated he reviewed
the traffic report and there are three basic concern: 1) access coming off Lakeshore
Drive coming between the two fast food restaurants where the parking ends up backing
out into access lanes along the aisle into the proposed project; 2) truck traffic into the
shopping center for the grocery store it is not separate from regular shopper traffic; 3)
entrance off Riverside Drive, signalized entrance, the peak hour traffic is around 650 cars
per hour, and depending on the timing of the traffic signal there could be 10 -20 vehicles
backed up, and the concern is that they are backing up closer to that curve on Riverside
Drive, this is a blind curve with limited sight distance. He further stated that perhaps the
traffic engineers could look at this and address it in their report, and propose a solution.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing none,
the public hearing was closed at 7:24 p.m.
Commissioner Schiffner commented on condition 28, and stated that he assumes this
condition will stay as quoted and proposed that on the plan, elimination of some of the
wall, and work with the Community Development Director in regard to that.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to Mr. Bolton's comments on the traffic report and stated
that he appreciates his concerns but does not feel this is a great concern because Cal -
Trans has gone over this thoroughly. He noted that the applicant will be required to put
an advance warning signal up, and by widening this roadway, in that direction will
essentially change the curve considerably and as far as the cars backing into the other
access area, it is no different than it is now, except a little heavier traffic flow. He
explained that this traffic is not going to be a major portion by any means since it is
going to be a secondary access. He stated that he felt that the additional traffic might be
an asset to the other businesses, therefore he does not see this as an additional concern.
Commissioner Barnes stated that when he reviews the plans he likes to make a list and
compare it with the staff report and upon his review he found that 90% of his questions
had been answered by staff and commend staff for their good work. He questioned the
water and sewer service and the agency that will provide those services. He further
questioned if adequate fire flow had been identified as adequate for that size of structure.
He questioned the time of delivery of product to the store and asked if that had been
addressed. He noted the advanced warning system at the traffic signal at Lash to give
adequate warning that traffic would be stopped over the rise on Riverside Drive.
Commissioner Matthies stated her concerns regarding Condition No. 13, and asked that
the Condition include that the A/C units be painted to match the roof due the homes at
higher elevations. Community Development Director Leslie stated that he has seen that
the units have been mounted to match the roof, but he does not know if the units are
purchased in that manner or painted to do so. Chairman Wilsey asked if the units could
be housed. Community Development Director Leslie stated that he is not sure what type
of system that they will be using, but usually housing the units will not allow them to be
effective. Glen Holmes stated that they have already addressed the problem of painting
the equipment to match the roof, since they will be unable to screen properly from the
residents above. He stated that he agreed with the Commissioner and that it is part of
their plan. Commissioner Matthies stated her concern regarding Condition No. 14, and
the possible hazards created between the two restaurants with that area as a secondary
access. She further stated her concern that even though Riverside Drive is going to be
widened, that there will still be a problem with the 90- degree turn when vehicles come
over the rise even with warning signals. She stated that it would still be easy to miss and
feels that there will still be problems. She explained that she has had problems with the
Real Estate Office being on that street and people turning to go into that area.
Commissioner Matthies stated that she still has a concern with the second light and
second entrance in that area. She further stated that this area will be the major truck
traffic and would encourage people to use the secondary entrance. She explained that she
is against using the drive. She noted her concern regarding the vending machines still
being visible to the street even though they will be under the canopy. She explained that
they could be placed behind the pillars as a form of screening. Chairman Wilsey pointed
out that if the vending machines are screened too much then it creates a security problem.
Commissioner Matthies agreed and stated that it is a tough situation. She noted her
concern regarding a potential future Memorandum of Understanding regarding the cost
of maintenance for the warning signs and stated that it was not clear if it was to be Cal -
Trans, the City or the applicant who would pay for this. Community Development
Director Leslie stated that in the letter that the City received from Cal -Trans there was
no mention of maintenance. He explained that at an intersection where there is a traffic
signal the basic cost of maintenance is split, because of the streets entering onto Highway
74 and therefore Cal -Trans splits the cost. He noted that due to the fact that there are no
City streets entering in that area he is not sure how Cal -Trans will want to handle this
issue. He further explained that with the passage of Proposition 218, serious questions
have been raised about the City's ability to increase the Lighting and Landscaping funds
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NNE 18, 1997
to maintain additional signals and whether it will require a vote of the people to take this
type of action, therefore staff felt it prudent, not knowing what Cal -Trans will decide, to
recommend that the cost be passed on to the applicant. Community Development
Director Leslie pointed out that at a later time the signal may be of benefit to the other
property owners, however he did not know how the City could recover costs in the future
from those property owners for the maintenance of the signal. He explained that Cal -
Trans will do the maintenance, but as in other circumstances they would bill the City for
electricity and maintenance.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he sees the signal as a private drive signal for Albertsons
alone and he stated that he does not see why anyone else would have to pay for the
maintenance of it. He noted that it is located on a State Highway and will have to be
dedicated to Cal- Trans, however it is there for only one purpose. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that it will be up to Cal -Trans how this will be
handled. Chairman Wilsey suggested flexibility be added to Condition No. 41 to state
subject to direction of the Community Development Director ". Community Development
Director Leslie clarified what the Commission would like him to do and asked if they
wanted him to ascertain what Cal -Trans would want to do with this issue. Chairman
Wilsey stated that this would give the City the opportunity to have flexibility to work
with the applicant and Cal -Trans. This would allow the applicant to work some type of
agreement out with Council or have some type of guideline to take to Council. Chairman
Wilsey stated that what the intent of this is, is to allow some flexibility for both the
applicant and the City. Community Development Director Leslie asked for specific
direction. He asked if the Commission wanted to have the applicant to bear the cost of
the signal or at least any costs that Cal -Trans would expect the City to pay for, or does
the Commission want the City to pay for it. Chairman Wilsey stated that it is the
applicants' signal and therefore they should pay for it. Community Development Director
Leslie asked that the condition not be changed, but left as written.
Commissioner Matthies stated that she still has major concerns regarding traffic and cost
effectiveness.
Commissioner Sands addressed the secondary driveway on Lakeshore and stated that
perhaps pedestrian cross -walks would take care of the problem of safety factors for
pedestrians as expressed by Commissioner Matthies. He asked for her input.
Commissioner Matthies noted that with the two doors of the restaurants set back there
would have to be a cross -walk right in the middle of the driveway. She commented that
it would be nice, however she did not feel that it would solve the problem.
Commissioner Sands stated that perhaps our Traffic Engineer could review this issue and
make some suggestions. He stated that he would not be opposed to signage on the side
of the building facing Lakeshore, however the signage on the front of the building would
be sufficient rather than grant a variance on a 12 -foot monument sign on Lakeshore
Drive. He noted that this could cause a conflict with traffic along that roadway. He
further stated that if they are entertaining the thought of a monument sign on Lakeshore
Drive then perhaps it could be shared with Taco Bell and SS Burger Basket. He noted
the curve on Riverside Drive and stated that he felt that it is a major concern. He stated
that he does not know who's responsibility those would be, however this is a very
important issue and should be closely examined. He clarified the roof plan.
Commissioner Barnes asked if it were a possibility that Cal -Trans would not approve the
traffic signal and if it is not approved has the applicant thought of an alternate plan to
address traffic. Community Development Director Leslie stated that all the indications
that the City has received from Cal -Trans indicate that they will approve the signal. He
explained the process and noted the time necessary to do so. He explained that staff has
talked with the applicant regarding an alternate plan, however at this time it appears that
Cal -Trans will approve the signal. Commissioner Barnes questioned the signage.
Chairman Wilsey asked if the signage would be brought back for approval. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that in this project the signage is included and noted
that the only condition on signage is on Page three of the Staff Report. He explained that
the sign would have to be brought down to 6 feet to meet the Municipal Code and noted
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
Commissioner Sands comments regarding the sign on the side of the building. He stated
that the sign would be placed high enough on the building to be visible over Del Taco.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he would have no problem with that type of signage.
Community Development Director Leslie explained that Condition No. 3 addresses the
height of the monument. He further explained the reason this supermarket wants to sit
alone is because it will have multiple services within the establishment that would
ordinarily be found in a market center and noted that there will be a pharmacy and bank
within the market itself. He further explained what an integrated development is and
stated that if it was an integrated development then it would require a variance.
Tom Courtney noted that early on in the project there was considerable discussion with
staff regarding signage and the integration of materials from the building and bringing
them over into the sign to create a connection between the building and the sign and this
would address lowering a pylon sign. He explained that if they lower the monument sign
using the building materials would defeat the purpose that they intended. He stated that
they would rather submit a pylon sign and eliminate the monument sign rather than obtain
a variance. He stated that it was designed in the corporate spirit and aesthetics of the
building, however if the monument sign is going to create a problem, then they will
submit a pylon sign instead. Community Development Director Leslie stated that a pylon
sign is allowed only if the project is integrated with five or more businesses.
Associate Planner Villa explained the pylon signage to the applicant and noted that with
five or more businesses it would be allowed, however the businesses must be separate.
Chairman Wilsey stated that the existing sign would require a variance if they felt that
strongly about it, or lower it to six feet.
Associate Planner Villa explained that even with the monument sign being lowered to six
feet they would still have to integrate the materials found in the building.
Commissioner Barnes stated that even if the monument sign is lowered to six feet he
would ask that consideration be given to location so that it does not affect site distance
for entering and exiting the driveway.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he liked the sign and would have to be shown why
it would not be acceptable before he would vote against it. He noted his concern
regarding the traffic on Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive, however he does not know
of any other solution to address this issue.
Commissioner Sands addressed Condition 3a. and stated that if the applicant placed their
fencing on the rear of their property it would take care of their responsibilities.
Commissioner Barnes suggested that in the body of the conditions that it be required that
the applicant work with the other property owner to resolve the issue.
Chairman Wilsey questioned if there was any way that landscaping could be addressed
against the large wall. Ken Andrew stated that there was some landscaping planned
against the wall, however not immediately adjacent to the building because of ramps etc.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he would be happier to see some landscaping used to break
the mass of wall up. Tom Courtney stated that the applicant agrees and explained that
there is a 100 x 20 foot deep area that could handle more landscaping and it would be
acceptable to do so. Community Development Director Leslie explained that it was staff's
intent in Condition No. 3 to look for more architectural treatment of the wall with some
pop -outs and mirroring some of the treatment from the front of the building to add a little
more depth and shadow on the wall. He stated that if it is Commission's desire to add
additional landscaping in that area, he asked that Commission modify the condition to
read either /or to allow flexibility. Chairman Wilsey stated that Condition No. 3 should
reflect that verbiage and stated that 3a. should reflect the verbiage to have the applicant
work with the adjacent property owner to resolve the problems. Community Development
Director Leslie stated that the wall between the properties extends all the way up and
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NNE 18, 1997
down. He noted that to get over to the Stater Brother's property the wall would have to
be scaled or go around either end. He further noted that because of the emergency access
along the side of Albertsons they are going to have some ready access to that area in the
rear, and the Police Department did have some very real problems with this. He further
stated that he understands that in order to erect something it is going to take the
cooperation of the adjacent property owner, so therefore he suggested that the condition
be changed to read: "The applicant shall make a good faith effort to approach and work
with the adjacent property owner in order to erect the appropriate barriers at the two ends
of the building. "and staff will lend their assistance to that effort. Chairman Wilsey
clarified that a wrought iron gate and tie -off would be adequate in that area. Community
Development Director Leslie agreed. Chairman Wilsey stated that he is very concerned
about the traffic and noted that Condition No. 41 addressed a flashing beacon at Riverside
Drive. He further stated that he would carry that one step farther and at the very top of
the hill post a sign that not only would flash, but would read "Prepare to Stop" and would
be coordinated with the signalization below. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that the
suggestion would have to be approved by Cal- Trans. Chairman Wilsey stated that he felt
that this would be far superior to some flashing yellow sign that said "signal ahead" and
his suggestion would provide more safety. There was general discussion in regard to the
advance warning signage.
Mr. Holmes explained that Cal -Trans has reviewed a set of preliminary conditions that
the City has and in those conditions they stipulated a requirement for a flashing warning
light. He further stated that any signage other than that would have to be submitted and
approved. He explained that the flashing yellow light will give proper warning and the
placement of the sign will be determined by Cal -Trans and if the City wishes any
additional warning signage it will have to be taken to Cal -Trans for consideration and
approval.
Chairman Wilsey asked the City Engineer about the 30 -foot driveway off Lakeshore and
asked for the width of the two drive lanes when the parking stalls are taken into
consideration. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that it is around 30 feet. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that the 30 feet is independent of the parking stalls.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he sees some serious problems there in regard to parking at
the fast food restaurants and he could see a problem with people backing into traffic and
this occurs even without a market there. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that it is a
problem with the short approach, however the easement has been there since the map was
recorded to provide access to the parcel in the back. Chairman Wilsey stated that
possibly this problem could be addressed by making this an exit only area or possibly
work with the other property owners to redo their parking in such a way that it would
resolve the situation. He noted diagonal parking. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that
there would have to be additional time given to allow proper review by a traffic
engineer. He stated that consideration was given to the parking and cars backing up into
the street, however it was felt that there was ample room.
Chairman Wilsey questioned the left turn situation from that driveway entering into a left
turn pocket on Lakeshore Drive. City Engineer O'Donnell stated there is serious concern
regarding that issue and they are going to work with the developer to resolve that issue
with a stripping plan and if it does not work then it will have to be addressed with a "No
Left Hand Turn" situation. He stated that this would create an enforcement issue since
there is no physical way to create that situation. Chairman Wilsey asked that the City
Engineer give this matter further consideration prior to the item going to Council to see
if the issue can be resolved since he sees it as a problem that will only increase. Mr.
Courtney stated that ingress and egress is an issue that they have considered and it is
important for their customers to have that ability to facilitate their shopping access.
Chairman Wilsey stated that the only other alternative is to make it a "No Left Turn"
entrance.
There was general discussion in regard to the secondary access and the possible traffic
and parking conflict.
PAGE SEVEN - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
Commissioner Barnes stated that on the map it shows an optional access to the Chevron
Station and stated that he felt this access would be a big mistake and he would not be in
favor of it. He explained that it would create a major traffic problem. The applicant
explained that this was proposed to facilitate the customers of the gas station who wished
to market and the persons who were at the market and needed gas. He further explained
that it was proposed to allow the customers access to both facilities without having to go
back out on the highway. He noted that this is only proposed and has not been worked
out with Chevron.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if it would be possible to install a speed bump at the
entrance to the Albertsons parking lot from the secondary entrance to slow people down.
Chairman Wilsey suggested that Condition Number 57, be added to read "The applicant
and City shall attempt to meet with the two fast food restaurant property owners
and try to work out an improved parking plan specifically for the common driveway
to the Albertsons between the two restaurants off of Lakeshore Drive. ", and this way
at least the City has made an attempt to resolve this problem. Community Development
Director Leslie noted that the City cannot force the two restaurant owners into this
meeting.
Commissioner Matthies addressed Condition Number 27, regarding the vending machines
and stated that the applicant asked that this be changed. Community Development
Director Leslie stated that in the past Planning Commission and City Council have not
found placing vending machines under the canopy to be adequate, however this can be
changed to read to be partially concealed from view.
Community Development Director Leslie clarified the changes to Condition Number 3,
Condition Number 13, Condition Number 41 and Condition Number 57.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 97-4
AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97 -2 BASED ON THE FINDINGS LISTED
IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 97-3, ENTITLED AS
FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -3
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 GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 97 -2 (APN 378 - 290 -005, 378- 290 -019, 378 -290-
021, 378 - 290 -022, and 378 - 290 -023)
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES CASTING THE DISSENTING VOTE TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 97-5 BASED ON THE
FINDINGS, EXHIBITS "A" THRU "F ", AND SUBJECT TO THE ATTACHED 56
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE
FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:
Condition No. 3: Side elevations shall be
modified by the inclusion of landscaping for screening and
softening purposes and /or by the addition of architectural
enhancements consistent with the front elevation to ineefper-ste
more ar-ehiteeP al elements of design stent with the Q
elevatiea. Site improvements shall be constructed as indicated on
the approved site plan and elevations. Subsequent revisions to
approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to
PAGE EIGHT - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
the discretion of the Community Development Director. All plans
submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform with the
submitted plans or as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the
City Council through subsequent action. All signage shown in the
plans shall be modified to meet standard Code requirements or as
otherwise specifically approved.
a) The applicant
the baek ef the building shall make a good faith effort to
approach the adjacent property owners regarding the
placement of barriers between their wall and the
applicant's building to prevent unauthorized access to the
area between the back of the building and the perimeter
wall of the adjacent development to the west, and City
staff shall lend their assistance in this effort.
Condition No. 13: All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other
mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be painted
to match the roof and blend together and architecturally screened
so that they are not visible from neighboring property, and public
streets. Cross sections for the proposed market shall be submitted
to determine if screening is necessary. If determined necessary,
screening plan shall be approved by the Community Development
Director, prior to issuance of building permit.
Condition No. 27: All vending machines, tables, kid's rides, newspaper racks,
telephones and similar devices, if proposed shall be at least
partially concealed from view with a structure consistent with the
building design. These shall be approved by the Community
Development Director or designee prior to installation.
Condition No. 41: Applicant shall design and construct a traffic signal at the driveway
on Riverside Drive with an interconnect to the signal at Lakeshore
Drive and Riverside Drive. Applicant shall also construct advance
warning overhead flashing beacons located on Riverside Drive
northeast of the driveway. The design of the traffic signal shall
include a complete striping plan for Riverside Drive from
northeasterly of the warning beacon to and including the
intersection with Lakeshore Drive. The City shall bear no costs for
installation, operation and maintenance of the signal and warning
beacons. Any cost associated with these items that Caltrans may
otherwise expect the City to absorb shall be borne by the applicant.
Staff together with the applicant will approach Caltrans about
the possibility and feasibility of coordinating the flashing
beacon with the signal.
Condition No. 57: The applicant and City shall attempt to meet with the two fast
food restaurant property owners and try to work out an
improved parking plan specifically for the common driveway
to the Albertsons between the two restaurants off of Lakeshore
Drive.
BUSINESS ITEMS
NONE
AT THIS TIME, 8:45 P.M., CHAIRMAN WILSEY STATED THE PLANNING COMMISSION
WOULD ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE; HOWEVER, WOULD
TAKE A SHORT RECESSED PRIOR TO STARTING THIS MEETING.
PAGE NINE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 18, 1997
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 8:59 P.M.
STAFF COMMENTS
No comment.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Barnes
No comment.
Commissioner Schiffner
No comment.
Commissioner Sands
No comment.
Commissioner Mattbies
No comment.
Chairman Wilsey
No comment.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY BARNES SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 9:04 P.M.
----------- - - - - -- - -- - - - - - --
AL WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Respectfully Submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 2, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR JULY 2, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF A QUORUM.
Respectfully submit ed,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Schiffner.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, MATTHIES AND SCHIFFNER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: WILSEY
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa, and City
Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
Moved by Commissioner Sands, Seconded by Commissioner Barnes and carried by unanimous
of those present vote to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
1. The following Minutes were approved.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - June 18, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - July 2, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Zone Change 97 -1, Conditional Use Permit 97 -5, Commercial Project 97 -4 - Argy
Construction (George Smvriotis) - Continued from July 2 1997
Associate Planner Villa explained the request entails a Zone Change from Limited
Manufacturing (M -1) to General Commercial (C -2). Also, Design Review (building
structure and site plan design) for the construction of a 3,255 square foot fast -food
restaurant, parking lot, landscaping and infrastructure improvements and a Conditional
Use Permit to allow a drive -thru at the proposed restaurant at the northwest corner of the
intersection of Riverside Drive (Highway 74) and Collier Avenue.
Associate Planner Villa stated the subject site is currently zoned M -1 with a General Plan
designation of Freeway Business, and pursuant to the General Plan Land Use
Compatibility Matrix the M -1 zoning is not compatible with the Freeway Business
designation; therefore, this site is not consistent with the General Plan. He explained that
General Commercial (C -2) and Commercial Manufacturing (C -M) zoning districts are
compatible with the Freeway Business according to the Land Use Matrix. He further
explained that in the Freeway Business area the direction has been to zone the parcels
closer to the freeway as C -2 and reserve those parcels in between as C -M. He explained
that the applicant has requested a C -2 zoning designation because the C -M zone does not
allow restaurants with drive -thrus. In this case, the Commission is being asked to
consider whether the C -2 zoning is appropriate for this intersection based on the existing
and future land use pattern. He further explained that staff concerns on traffic, circulation
and architectural design have been mitigated by project redesign or conditions of
approval. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission consider an appropriate
recommendation to City Council on Zone Change 97 -1, if the Commission recommends
approval of the C -2 Zone Change, staff recommends considering limiting this change of
zone to the restaurant pad /area only; if the requested zone change is deemed appropriate
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 16, 1997
staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of
Commercial Project 97 -4, Mitigated Negative Declaration 97 -5, and approval of
Conditional Use Permit 97 -5.
Vice Chairman Schiffner opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. asking for those wishing
to speak on the matter. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at 7:12 p.m.
Community Development Director Leslie informed the Commission that the applicant
was in the audience. He then asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission or just answer any questions that arise. Mr. Argy stated that he would
answer any questions.
Commissioner Barnes stated that staff did a thorough job. He then asked about the
treatment for the perimeter of the project, fencing/block wall. Mr. Argy stated there is
an existing chainlink fence on the north side, but has not indicated any fencing.
Community Development Director Leslie stated the Zoning Code does not require
perimeter fencing or walls and that fencing would only come into play if the property
abutted residential property. Commissioner Barnes referred to the plans and asked what
the double line adjacent to the cross section represents. Associate Planner Villa stated
this represents a six-inch curb. Community Development Leslie explained that this
restaurant project will be part of a future integrated development. Commissioner Barnes
asked whether handicap parking will be designated. Associate Planner Villa stated this
plan does not illustrate the handicap parking, but parking space 28 and 29 will be
designated for handicap parking. Commissioner Barnes then referred to condition number
42 and suggested the word "should" be changed to "shall ".
Commissioner Sands asked about the hours of operation. Associate Planner Villa stated
the hours of operation are from 6:00 a.m. to midnight. Commissioner Sands stated that
he has no problem with the proposed project or its location as long as the applicant
conforms to Caltrans requirements /recommendations. He then stated that he sees no need
to change the remaining property from its M -1 designation.
Commissioner Matthies stated that she has no problem with the project and looks forward
to it coming into town.
Mr. Argy questioned condition number 51 pertaining to the contribution for the design
and construction of one -half of a raised landscape median along Riverside Drive. Mr.
Argy requested this condition be deleted since the length and location has not been
formally decided by Caltrans. City Engineer O'Donnell explained that the General Plan
classifies Riverside Drive as a Major Street, all major streets have a 14 -foot median, and
it is either construct the median or pay for half of it. Mr. O'Donnell stated the
contribution was calculated as if the median would be built today. Community
Development Director Leslie explained that at this point Riverside Drive is part of the
State Highway System, and in the comments received from Caltrans they are not requiring
a median; however, Riverside Drive is also identified in the City's Circulation Element
as a Major Arterial and the City does require a median. Vice Chairman Schiffner asked
about the mechanics, posting of a bond, obviously the applicant is not going to build the
median. Community Development Director Leslie stated this would be a cash deposit that
goes into a specific fund.
Discussion ensued on condition number 51 pertaining to posting of a bond and the time
frame associated with the construction of the median.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that he likes the project and has no objections. He then
commented on the parking and striping plan and stated that he assumes this is only an
approximation, noting the impossibility of the right angles and drive -thru.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE 97 -1, COMMERCIAL PROJECT 97 -4, CONDI-
TIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -5 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 97 -5.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 16, 1997
Community Development Director Leslie asked for clarification on the Zone Change. He
asked if the recommendation to the City Council was based on the applicant's request or
if there was modification.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that staff recommended that the Commission not include
the remainder of the property only the restaurant site. Community Development Director
Leslie explained that the applicant has requested a zone change from M -1 to C -2 on the
entire 3.37 acres; however staff has suggested in their recommendation that due the land
use patterns that the Commission consider whether they want to grant the zone change
over the entire 3.37 acres or just over the portion where the drive -thrn restaurant is
proposed. Commissioner Sands stated his recommendation would be to break it up and
have C -2 zoning on the restaurant property only.
COMMISSIONER SANDS AMENDED HIS MOTION TO INCLUDE THE FULL
PARCEL TO C -2 ZONING, ZONE CHANGE 97 -1.
COMMISSIONER SANDS RESTATED HIS MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE
CITY COUNCIL RELATIVE TO ZONE CHANGE 97 -1 THAT THE FULL PARCEL
BE CHANGED TO C -2 ZONING AND THE OTHER RECOMMENDATION STAND.
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Commissioner Matthies asked if there was an idea on the uses proposed in the future by
the applicant, and if it would be more beneficial for the applicant to stay with his request.
Mr. Argy stated that he plans a strip center. Community Development Director Leslie
explained that C -M zoning does allow some retail uses; however, nothing of the nature
of C -2. He further explained that if the applicant comes back with a strip center that
includes uses that are not otherwise allowed in the C -M zone then he would have to come
back later with a request for C -2 zoning on the rest of the property, and if he proposes
uses allowed in the C -M zone then he will not have to request that zone change.
Community Development Director Leslie stated that if the Commission is going with the
C -2 zoning on just the restaurant parcel then staff is recommending a change of zoning
on the remainder parcel from M -1 to C -M, because the M -1 is not consistent with the
General Plan designation. He explained that the other option would be to zone the entire
property C -2 or C -M; however, the C -M would not allow the drive -thru restaurant.
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked why this property should not be all zoned C -2 at this
time. Community Development Director Leslie stated the General Commercial and
Commercial Manufacturing classifications are consistent with the General Plan
designation of Freeway Business, and C -2 has been applied to property closer to the
freeway and the property in between would be devoted toward manufacturing uses. Also,
traffic was reviewed at the various intersections and the Riverside \Collier intersection is
one of the busiest intersections.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that he would support rezoning the entire project site to
C -2. Community Development Director Leslie stated that staff did not make a
recommendation on the Zone Change as a whole, but informed the Commission that there
was an option.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE 97 -1,
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION ON 2.54 ACRES FROM LIMITED
MANUFACTURING (M -1) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C -2), COMMERCIAL
PROJECT 97 -4 BASED ON THE FINDINGS, EXHIBITS "A" THRU "C" AND
SUBJECT TO THE 52 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF
REPORT WITH AMENDMENT TO CONDITION NUMBER 42 CHANGING THE
WORD "SHOULD" TO "SHALL", AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
97 -5, AND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -5.
Condition No. 42: Driveway on Riverside Dr. should shall be used as a future joint
use driveway for the property east of this site.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 16, 1997
BUSINESS ITEMS
3. Monopole Cellular Antenna /Cell and Prefabricated Shelter Station - LA Cellular
Associate Planner Villa explained the request entails Design Review for the construction
of a thirty-foot high steel monopole and prefabricated equipment shelter, 12' x 28' (816
square feet) for wireless cellular communications at an existing abandoned Elsinore Water
District reservoir within the Country Club Heights area. These improvements are being
planned with the Elsinore Water District water tank/reservoir project, which involves
demolition of the abandoned reservoir, grading for a developable pad and construction of
retaining walls, fencing. LA Cellular is only required to obtain Design Review for the
monopole and shelter facility as the improvements planned by the Water District are
exempt from the Municipal Code pursuant to State regulations. He further explained that
staff has conditioned the project to provide decorative fencing and landscape treatment
around the shelter, and approval is recommended.
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked if there was anyone present wishing to speak on the
matter.
Mr. Dave Leonard, representing LA Cellular, introduced Mr. Dan Hare of LA Cellular
and stated together they will answer any questions. Mr. Leonard then provided a brief
summary on the communication service provided by LA Cellular. Mr. Leonard explained
that the transmitter located in Elsinore Hills is over capacity and that this facility will
remedy. Mr. Leonard stated agreement with the conditions of approval as proposed and
asked that condition number 7 be modified by adding a provision for providing a
performance bond for the construction of landscaping at the time water service is
available. He stated there will be no water supply until the water reservoir is built and
do not want to plant materials that will die.
Commissioner Sands commended staff on their excellent work, and stated that he has no
questions.
Commissioner Barnes stated his questions concerning irrigation have been answered. He
then stated that the applicant's suggestion for a bond in lieu of landscaping /irrigation is
acceptable.
Commissioner Matthies stated concurrence with Commissioner Barnes and complimented
staff on the job done.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated he favors the applicant's suggestion for a bond in lieu of
landscaping /irrigation.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER BARNES, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
APPROVE DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STEEL
MONOPOLE AND PREFABRICATED SHELTER STRUCTURE AT APN 375 -224-
019, 026, & 031, BASED ON THE FINDINGS, EXHIBIT "A ", AND THE 18
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE
FOLLOWING AMENDMENT.
Condition No. 7: Landscaping plans shall be prepared showing the incorporation of
additional landscaping in and around the prefabricated structure and
monopole to the satisfaction of the City's Landscape Architect and
the Community Development Director or Designee. The applicant
shall post a performance bond for landscaping and irrigation
prior to Building and Planning Department clearance instead
of providing full improvements, since there will be several
months between the construction of the communication facilities
and the improvements planned by Elsinore Water District.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 16, 1997
AT THIS TIME, 7:38 P.M., THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE.
AT THIS TIME, 7:54 P.M., THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED.
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie informed the Commission of a Joint Planning
Commission/City Council Study Session scheduled for August 5 at 3:00 p.m., to hear a
presentation on the Alberbill Raceway Sports and Entertainment project.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
No comment.
Commissioner Barnes
Asked staff for a status report on:
Car dealership and the apartment complex on Casino Drive. Community Development
Director Leslie stated they have received Caltrans approval to bring the water line across
the Franklin overpass. USA received approval from the Fire Department, with
concurrence from the City, to bring combustible material onto the site, and received
permission to tie into the lower pressure water system that currently exists at Mill Street.
Lake Chevrolet recently received Fire Department approval, foundation permit only, a
trailer has been put on the site, and they may look to expand upon their Fire Department
approval. Lake Chevrolet is hoping to be open in time to start receiving the 98 models.
USA is still hoping to have their units ready for occupancy by January 1, 1998.
2. World Savings in Elsinore City Center. Community Development Director Leslie stated
that World Savings and El Pollo Loco are both in plan check and have been for a while.
El Pollo Loco wanted to be open by summer, but obviously this is not going to happen,
so it seems that they have slowed the pace. Commissioner Schiffner asked if they have
a building permit. Community Development Director Leslie responded in the affirmative
and explained that it is actually a foundation permit only, but building plans are approved
and the only reason building permits have not been pulled is that they do not have water
to the site. They do not even have a hydrant set for the low pressure system.
Commissioner Schiffner
Asked for a status report on the water park. Community Development Director Leslie stated that
he could not provide an update.
Commissioner Matthies
Asked for a status report on the driving range. Associate Planner Villa stated the applicant was
contacted a few months ago and he indicated that the requirements of the water district need to
be completed and that financing was an issue. Community Development Director Leslie stated
that staff has been contacted by people interested in a driving range and staff has suggested this
location and that they contact the applicant, but they have not expressed interest in this site.
Chairman Wilsey
Absent.
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 16, 1997
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 8:03 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
*Lindalnndsta
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 6, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 6, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schiffner.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, MATTHIES, SCHIFFNER AND
WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Also present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no request to speak the PUBLIC COMMENTS Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
Moved by Commissioner Schiffner, Seconded by Commissioner Barnes and carried by a vote
of 4 -0 with Chairman Wilsey abstaining to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
1. The following Minutes were approved.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - July 16, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - August 6, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Variance 97 -4 - Albertson
Chairman Wilsey noted the request for continuance to September 17, 1997 and called for
a motion.
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
SANDS TO CONTINUE VARIANCE 97 -4 TO THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,
1997.
Commissioner Barnes inquired about the reason for continuance. Community
Development Director Leslie explained the applicant submitted plans that showed an
optional sign on Lakeshore Drive and that the applicant is still meeting with the adjacent
property owners (Del Taco and SS Burger Basket) regarding cooperative signage.
The foregoing motion carried by unanimous vote of those present.
3. Specific Plan 89 -2 Amendment No. 4 - T T Group_
Chairman Wilsey noted the request for continuance and called for a motion.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SANDS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER
MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO
CONTINUE SPECIFIC PLAN 89 -2 AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO A FUTURE DATE TO
BE RENOTICED.
BUSINESS ITEMS
NONE
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - AUGUST 20, 1997
AT THIS TIME, 7:07 P.M., THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE.
AT THIS TIME, 7:38 P.M., THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED.
STAFF COMMENTS
No comment.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
No comment.
Commissioner Barnes
No comment.
Commissioner Schiffner
No comment.
Commissioner Matthies
Commented on the two complaints filed with regard to the abandoned apartment complex to the
northwest of 403 West Graham (across from the fire station). People have broken in and are
living there and children are unattended. Also, the sale of illegal substances was witnessed.
Commissioner Matthies stated she would like this brought the the attention of someone, because
her written complaint has not been responded to.
Community Development Director Leslie stated that he would discuss the matter with Code
Enforcement.
Chairman Wilsey
No comment.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:42 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
IMaTrinds aff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 3, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA
ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Commissioner Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schiffner.
ROLL CALL
SANDS, SCHIFFNER AND WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES AND MATTHIES
Also Present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa, City
Engineer O'Donnell and Deputy City Clerk Bryning.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
COMMISSIONER MATTHIES ARRIVED AT THE MEETING AT 7:02 P.M.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
1. Minutes.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - August 20, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - September 3, 1997
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Variance 97 -4 - Albertson (Continued from August 20, 1997)
Chairman Wilsey explained that there was a request to continue this item to October 1,
1997.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO CONTINUE VARIANCE 97 -4 -
ALBERTSONS TO OCTOBER 1, 1997.
3. Variance 97 -3 - and Design Review of Monopole - Cox Communication.
Chairman Wilsey opened the pubic hearing at 7:03 p.m. and asked if anyone would like
to address the item. The following person spoke:
Deborah Melvin, representative of Cox Communication stated that she would be pleased
to answer any questions.
Hearing no further request to speak the public hearing was closed at 7:04 p.m.
Associate Planner Villa explained that the project is a 75 foot Monopole which exceeds
the maximum height allowed and is located within the R -1 Zoning which requires a
variance. He noted that the only concern that staff has is the height, however the
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 17, 1997
applicant has indicated that they need the height to receive and transmit signals along the
freeway corridor. Mr. Villa stated that staff recommends that the Commission consider
the request for Variance 97 -3 and Design Review of the Monopole. He further stated that
should the Commission feel this is acceptable staff recommends the findings and
conditions as found in staff report:
Commissioner Sands asked if the water tank was in use. Associate Planner Villa stated
that it was. Commissioner Sands stated that he visited the site and did not see the
potential for growth in that area that would pose a conflict. He noted that the height
requirement would be necessary to provide proper service.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he had no objections to the height of the facility and
because it is required to provide service and he does not see a problem with this site. He
further stated that he had no objections to the project.
Commissioner Matthies concurred with the former comments and stated that she did not
have a problem with this project.
Chairman Wilsey asked if the applicant had reviewed the findings and conditions or had
any questions regarding them. Ms. Melvin stated that her firm has reviewed the findings
and conditions and had no questions. She further stated that they concurred with staffs
recommendations.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE VARIANCE NO. 97-3,
AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MONOPOLE,
EQUIPMENT, AND ANTENNAS AT APN 378 -114 -005 BASED ON THE
FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE 10 CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF
REPORT.
4. Conditional Use Permit 97 -6 "California Skier at 600 Third Street" Charles Sacks
Associate Planner Villa stated that this is a request by California Skier to locate in
building "A" at 600 Third Street. He noted that the business will be for the sale of
recreational boats and some outdoor storage and display. He explained that staff has
analyzed the proposed use and has found that the proposed use will be adequately served
by the existing improvements and that there are no major concerns found by staff. He
further stated that it is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission approve the
request for Conditional Use Permit No. 97 -6, for the establishment of a business for the
sale of recreational boats and display at 600 Third Street within the Warm Springs
Business Park, based on the findings and conditions listed in the staff report.
Chairman Wilsey opened the pubic hearing at 7:08 p.m. and asked if anyone would like
to address the item. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed at 7:09 p.m.
Commissioner Matthies stated that staff did a good job and she is in favor of this project.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he was in favor of this project as long as the applicant
is satisfied with the findings and conditions.
Commissioner Sands stated that he visited the site and feels that this could be a successful
business venture and an increase in revenue for the City. He further stated that he has
no objections.
Chairman Wilsey asked if the applicant went to boat shows and other types of similar
events and asked if he sold his product through those types of venues. Charles Sacks,
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 17, 1997
applicant, agreed that he did. Chairman Wilsey asked if this would be his primary
address for business. Mr. Sacks stated that currently the primary location is in Riverside
with a satellite location in Santa Ana Valley along with approximately 160 days a year
in boat shows. Chairman Wilsey asked that when they move into this location if this
would be their primary office and business address. Mr. Sacks stated that it would.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he felt that this was a good thing and would bring revenue
to the City.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if all the billings would come from the Lake Elsinore
office. Mr. Sacks stated that all sales would be billed through the Lake Elsinore office.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 97 -6 FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A BUSINESS FOR THE SALE
OF RECREATIONAL BOATS AND OUTDOOR DISPLAY, LOCATED AT 600
THIRD STREET BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE 7
CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
5. General Plan Amendment 97 -3 and Zone Change 97 -2 - Assessor's Parcel Number 377-
330 -007 - Scott McDaniel
Associate Planner Villa explained that the request is to amend the General Plan Land Use
map changing the land use designation of an 18.11 acre site located along Franklin Street
from MD (Medium Density Residential, 12 dwelling units per acre) to GC (General
Commercial, .30 FAR) (GPA 97 -3). He noted that this application is also a request for
a corresponding change of zone from R -3 (High Density Residential Zoning) to C -2
(General Commercial) in order to bring the site's zoning into conformance with the
proposed General Plan designation (ZC 97 -2). He stated that staff has analyzed and it
appears that the requested amendment to the General Plan and corresponding Zone
Change to ultimately allow an automobile dealership would be preferable due to the site's
high visibility from the I -15 Freeway. He explained that the proposed amendment will
reduce the existing City -wide residential acreage by .167 %; will reduce the Medium
Density Residential acreage by 1.71%; increase the City -wide Commercial acreage by
.107 %; and the General Commercial Zoning acreage by 1.6 %. Associate Planner Villa
stated that staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend to City Council that
they approve Mitigated Negative Declaration 97 -7, General Plan Amendment 97 -3, Zone
Change 97 -2 and adopt Resolution 97 -4 based on the findings as listed in the Staff
Report.
Chairman Wilsey opened the pubic hearing at 7:15 p.m. and asked if anyone would like
to address the item.
Larry Buxton, representing the applicant Mr. Scott McDaniel, 801 N. Park Center Drive,
Suite 235, Santa Ana, stated that he was present to answer any questions and that he
agreed with staffs recommendation and requested approval.
Chairman Wilsey asked if anyone else would like to speak on the matter. Hearing no
further requests the public hearing was closed at 7:18 p.m.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he had no objections to the project, however he asked
to have the location of the project clarified. Community Development Director Leslie
explained that a portion of the property does have frontage on existing Franklin Street.
He further explained that it is the portion of the property immediately across the street
from the old Rodeo grounds. He noted that the south end of the property there is a
cellular communication tower. Commissioner Schiffner stated that he has no objections
to the project.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 17, 1997
Commissioner Matthies stated that she had no objections
Commissioner Sands stated that he felt that this project would be beneficial to the growth
of the City and that he had no objections to this project.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he concurred with the Commission and commented that he
was glad to see this project come into the City.
MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 97 -7,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97 -3, ZONE CHANGE 97 -2 BASED ON THE
FINDINGS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH PLANNING COMMISSION
ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 97 -4, ENTITLED AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO. 97 -4
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 GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 97 -3 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF APN 377 - 330 -077 FROM MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECESSED AT 7:19 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 7:40 P.M.
STAFF COMMENTS
None.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Matthies had no comment.
Commissioner Schiffner had no comment.
Commissioner Sands commented on the following:
Questioned if the street sweeper was still operating in his neighborhood. He stated that
his neighbors have raised the issue. Community Development Director Leslie stated that
it is part of City Resident's trash service and that if there are any questions they can call
during business hours and he will check on their sweeping days.
Chairman Wilsey commented on the following.
Announced that his wife took first place in the FCCA National for the third time in a
row.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 17, 1997
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7:45 P.M.
AL ILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Respectfully Submitted,
A Bryn& , Deputy 9(ty Cler
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Commissioner Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Schiffner.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SANDS, SCHIFFNER AND WILSEY
BARNES AND MATTHIES
Also Present were: Community Development Director Leslie, Associate Planner Villa, City
Engineer O'Donnell and Deputy City Clerk Bryning.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
1. Minutes.
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting - September 17, 1997
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR AS PRESENTED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Variance 97 -4 - Albertson (Continued from September 17 1997)
Associate Planner Villa stated that the project involves the placement of two free standing
sign for the future Albertson at Four Corners. He noted that the sign will be located
on Riverside Drive at the driveway entrance and on Lakeshore Drive which will replace
an existing sign owned by SS Burger Basket Restaurant. He further noted that the signs
measure approximately 21 feet wide by 12 feet in height and will have approximately 32
square feet of sign area on Riverside Drive and 41.5 square feet for the sign on Lakeshore
Drive that will include signage for the SS Burger Basket. He explained that the reason
why the applicant is requesting a variance is because the proposed signs are greater than
the allowed height, since the Zoning Code allows a maximum height of 6 feet above the
public sidewalk. He further stated that the purpose of the sign height is due to the
impaired visibility due to the curve on Riverside Drive and to accommodate the design.
Associate Planner Villa stated that staff recommends that the Planning Commission
approve Variance No. 97 -4 to allow the applicant to place two twelve (12) high
freestanding signs with 32 square feet of sign area based on the findings and condition
attached to the staff report.
Chairman Wilsey opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. asking those person in favor
of the project to speak.
Scott Fair, Real Estate Manager for Albertson, 1180 West Lambert, Brea, stated that he
was present to answer any question that the Commission might have.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 1, 1997
Chairman Wilsey asked for those persons to speak in opposition of the project
Mr. Johnson, 31904 Mission Trail, stated that he was not in favor of the placement of the
sign and noted that currently there are problems with safely entering and exiting the drive
on Lakeshore Drive and explained that there is a traffic site problem due to landscaping
and that the sign would further block the view of oncoming traffic. He further noted that
Lakeshore Drive starts off with two lanes at the light and then narrows down to one lane
and creates a traffic hazard for making ingress and egress from that site. He explained
that the trees block the view of oncoming traffic and signage will create a further
problem.
Chairman Wilsey asked if there were any other persons wishing to speak on the matter.
Hearing no further requests, the public hearing was closed at 7:09 p.m.
Commissioner Sands asked if the drive on Lakeshore Drive was a right -hand turn. Staff
stated that it was not. He asked that City Engineer O'Donnell address this issue.
City Engineer O'Donnell stated that the City can have Albertsons traffic engineer provide
a site distance analysis for that sign and if there is a problem then it will have to be
relocated which will not create a safety hazard.
Community Development Director Leslie stated that he met with Mr. Johnson prior to this
meeting, and he had expressed concern about the trees even without the sign and after
that meeting he had checked with Public Works and they indicated that they would have
no problem if those trees were removed from the right -of -way. He noted that the trees
could possibly be removed. He stated that the Public Works Division is not scheduling
the removal of the trees at this time, however if the applicant wished to work together
with SS Burger Basket and have the trees removed the City would not oppose the action.
Commissioner Sands asked if it would give the visual effect that the opposition is looking
for. Community Development Director Leslie stated that the trees do present a site
distance problem pulling out of the driveway and it would help to solve some of the site
distance problems.
Commissioner Schiffner asked about the curb line and how much distance is available for
signage from the curb.
Community Development Director Leslie asked what the parkway width is.
City Engineer O'Donnell stated that it is approximately 10 feet.
Community Development Director Leslie stated that the sign would have to be 5 feet in
back of the property line and if the right -of -way is 10 feet, then it would have to be a
minimum of 15 feet from the curb. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that the sign will be
on the property of SS Burger Basket.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that if the sign is 15 feet from the curb line then it should
not present a major problem, however he stated that the trees could be a problem.
Mr. Johnson stated that he still felt that the sign would cause a site problem.
Mr. Fair gave an overview of the sign on SS Burger Basket and stated that if there is not
enough room for the proposed sign, then they will make the sign smaller to suit the site
and they will accommodate that site.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if the trees were removed would the sign be O.K. City
Engineer O'Donnell stated that it would.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 1, 1997
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he would like to approve this project, however it
would be with a condition that the sign be located 15 feet from the curb and that the trees
be removed. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that the condition could read "subject to the
City Engineer's approval for site distance requirements ".
Community Development Director Leslie stated that Condition No. 2 already addressed
the 5 feet from the property line and noted the differences in right -of -way width.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he would like to see a minimum of 15 feet from curb
face along with the approval of the City Engineer.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if the applicant placed the sign on the other side of the
drive if that would be better. Mr. Johnson stated that he had discussed this with the
applicant and stated that there had been several accidents at that drive and that the sign
impedes the view of oncoming traffic.
Commissioner Sands suggested that the applicant get with the traffic engineer and
possibly hold this over until the next meeting to see if there are any alternatives.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he would like to see Condition No. 6 to read: Applicant shall
provide a site evaluation and site distance analysis subject to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and shall meet with the SS Burger Basket to address the removal of trees in the
right -of -way and work with the City Public Works Division for removal of trees and the
remaining stumps to include replacement of landscaping as approved by the Community
Development Director.
Chairman Wilsey asked if this would cause a great deal of landscaping. Community
Development Director Leslie stated that there is landscaping in place at this time, however
there will have to be some revision of the landscaping to accommodate the sign.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he would like to see this project get going and
approved of the condition.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE VARIANCE NO. 97-4,
BASED UPON THE FINDING AND CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF
REPORT WITH ADDED CONDITION NO. 6 TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
Condition No. 6: Applicant shall provide a site evaluation and site distance
analysis subject to the satisfaction of the City Engineer with a
minimum set back of 15 feet from curb line and shall meet
with the SS Burger Basket to address the removal of trees in
the right -of -way and work with the City Public Works Division
for removal of trees and the remaining stumps to include
replacement of landscaping as approved by the Community
Development Director.
BUSINESS ITEMS
3. Minor Design Review of Single - Family Residence - 17327 S11Mslone - Bowen.
Associate Planner Villa stated that this is a request for Minor Design Review for
construction of a 2,700 square foot single family home. He explained that the proposed
dwelling has met all applicable development standards of the Zoning Code as well as
Design Standards. He further stated that staff recommends approval of the Minor Design
Review at 17327 Sunnyslope Drive based on the findings and subject to the conditions
attached to the staff report.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 1, 1997
Chairman Wilsey question if there was a color board for this project. Associate Planner
Villa stated that the applicant was supposed to be present tonight and bring the color
board with them, however they are not present.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he has no comments on this project and he will rely
on staff and the City Engineer's conditions to address this project. He further stated that
he would have liked the applicant to be present to agree with the findings and conditions,
however since he is not present he will have to agree to them.
Commissioner Sands stated that the site is very pretty and he concurs with Commissioner
Schiffner.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he concurred and is very glad to see Single Family
Residence come before the Board. He noted that he hopes that this is just the beginning
of seeing more Single Family Residences, home owner built coming to the City. He
explained the fencing problems faced in that area.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE MINOR DESIGN
REVIEW AT 17327 SUNNYSLOPE DRIVE BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND
CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THE STAFF REPORT.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECESSED AT 7:26 P.M.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED AT 7:31 P.M.
STAFF COMMENTS
Community Development Director Leslie announced that he has submitted his resignation and
will be returning to his former employer for new opportunities. He thanked the Planning
Commission for his years of service and stated that staff has been very professional and that the
City has opportunities and possibilities. He wished everyone the best and stated that it has been
an honor to work with everyone.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands commented on the following:
Stated that the City has lost Mr. Ralph Brownell from Code Enforcement.
Commissioner Schiffner commented on the following:
Commented that he was glad to see a house being constructed on Sunnyslope and noted
that amount of open space in that area. There was general discussion in regard to the
location of the house.
Chairman Wilsey had no comments.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 1, 1997
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7:40 P.M.
Submitted,
L.
WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 15, 1997
The Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Commissioner Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, AND WILSEY
ABSENT:
MATTHIES
Also Present were: Senior Planner Villa, City Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Wilsey referred to Page 3, 5th paragraph and condition number 6, of the
Minutes and stated the word "show" should be changed to "provide ".
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 -0
WITH BARNES ABSTAINING AND MATTHIES ABSENT TO APPROVE THE
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 1, 1997, AS CORRECTED.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Commercial Project 96 -1 Revision No. 1 - Machado Storage - Gary Peblev
Senior Planner Villa explained the project entails Minor Design Review for the expansion
of Machado Storage at 16401 Lakeshore Drive. He provided a brief history on the
existing storage facility and stated that in February 1996 the Commission approved a
3,100 square foot expansion of the facility. Mr. Villa stated the applicant now wishes to
add three metal storage buildings along the Machado Street frontage. The proposed new
buildings are rectangular with the following dimensions 20' x 170' for 3,400 square feet,
30' x 125' for 3,750 square feet, 30' x 170' for 5,100 square feet for a total of 12,500
square feet. These new buildings would be constructed of metal (metal frame, siding,
roof, and roll -up doors) and associated improvements would be paving of the drive aisle
and areas surrounding it and construction of a screening wall along the Machado Street
frontage. Mr. Villa highlighted staff's concern on fencing and stated that the applicant
proposes to construct a combination wood fence with pilasters and add landscaping. Mr.
Villa stated another area of concern is the interior lot line setback of ten -feet, and the
Zoning Code requires a fifteen -foot setback in the C -1 Zone when adjacent to a
residential use; however, the applicant states that the adjacent residential use will be
demolished in the near future and providing the fifteen -foot setback would be a waste
after the building is torn down. Mr. Villa stated that the proposed expansion is being
viewed as a change to a more restrictive use from outdoor storage to indoor storage. Mr.
Villa stated the proposed use is not subject to the requirements of CEQA and staff
recommends approval based on the findings and conditions of approval.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1997
Chairman Wilsey recognized Mr. Gary Pebley.
Mr. Gary Pebley, 41820 Callie Cedral, Temecula, stated that he would answer any
questions that arise.
Commissioner Sands stated that in previous proposals the applicant and previous owner
have complied with every condition, and finds this change to a more restrictive use
pursuant to the Code should be allowed. Commissioner Sands stated that it would be his
recommendation to go with the wood fencing on the Machado Street side and tear the
house down.
Commissioner Schiffner commented on the 10 -foot dedication along Lakeshore Drive, and
asked if this was an additional 10 -feet making the property line approximately 20 -feet
behind the curb. Mr. Pebley stated that he is willing to dedicate the 10 -feet.
Mr. Pebley referred to condition number 27 and stated that he is concerned with this
condition as he has already paid to put curb, gutter and sidewalk in and now asking for
$3700 for a median and in talking with the Engineer does not believe there is any time
frame when this would be put in. Mr. Pebley stated that he would be willing to sign an
agreement that when it was put in he would be responsible for paying, but would not
want to put the money in now after putting in the curb, gutter and sidewalk.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he was going to ask staff about condition 27 and
asked if there was a median on Machado Street any where and the answer to that is no,
there is no existing median on Machado and believes this to be true on Lakeshore.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that he favored eliminating those two requirements
especially if the applicant agrees to participate in the future in some type of agreement.
Mr. Pebley stated that as far as the 10 -foot and the median he would sign an agreement
to participate in the future.
City Engineer O'Donnell addressed condition 27 and stated that Machado Street is
considered a Major Street, 100 -foot right -of -way, with a 14 -foot median and Lakeshore
Drive is considered a Major Arterial, 120 -foot right -of -way, with a median. He explained
that a developer is required to put in half -street improvements and dedicate the ultimate
right -of -way. In this case, the median on Lakeshore, the applicant has already put the
improvements in per Riverside County Standards, 100 -foot right -of -way, and in 1995 the
General Plan changed the Circulation Element where Lakeshore Drive is 120 -foot right -
of -way based on the model done in 1993. Mr. O'Donnell stated it is within the discretion
of the Planning Commission to waive this requirement for the median on Lakeshore
Drive. However, on Machado Street there are no improvements and the model was built
on 20 -20 as ultimate build out. Mr. O'Donnell then commented on funding of capital
improvement projects and the funds coming from people who are going to benefit from
the improvements. Mr. O'Donnell stated that if the development fronts Machado then the
applicant should pay for half the median.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if any other developers had put up money for a median
along Machado Street. Mr. O'Donnell stated that he could not say for sure, but Machado
was classified as a Secondary, no median required, and then in 1995 with the new
General Plan upgraded to a Major Street that requires a median. Mr. O'Donnell stated
the development will not front Machado Street as the developer proposes to do some lot
line adjustments and parcel mergers and this condition was included in case it does front
Machado. Commissioner Schiffner asked if this was because of the driveway access on
Machado. Mr. O'Donnell stated that driveway is considered as emergency access and it
will be an easement across the one parcel that fronts Machado.
Chairman Wilsey asked Commissioner Schiffner if he was suggesting elimination of
condition number 27. Commissioner Schiffner stated that he would recommend deletion
of condition 27 and condition 19, because the development does not front on that street.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1997
Commissioner Barnes commented on Section 17.38.070 and asked staff if this is
considered an existing development not a new development. Mr. Villa stated this is
considered an existing storage facility. Commissioner Barnes stated the decorative
masonry block fencing could be waived because it is existing and the applicant's proposal
would be acceptable. Senior Planner Villa stated it could be. Commissioner Barnes
asked what wood material is proposed and whether it will be painted or treated. Mr.
Pebley stated the fencing proposed is block pilasters with treated wood, wood on the back
of the pilasters and Oleander plants in front. Mr. Pebley stated that he was not tied to
the Oleander and if there is a better plant material would use it. Commissioner Barnes
asked for the height of the fence. Mr. Pebley responded six -foot. Commissioner Barnes
asked Mr. Pebley if he was comfortable with the fence height for security. Mr. Pebley
responded in the negative, but in a few years the plants will grow to a height of 12 to 14-
feet. Commissioner Barnes referred to the Analysis Section of the Staff Report and the
statement on "metal buildings as an interim use" and asked if they are proposed to be
only interim. Mr. Villa stated the reason why the metal buildings were allowed is
because this would be placed in an interim use and it is believed that those could be taken
out very easy. Commissioner Barnes referred to the plan and stated he does not
understand the access to the new buildings from Lakeshore. Mr. Pebley explained the
access to the new buildings from Lakeshore Drive.
Commissioner Schiffner referred to the fence and stated that he was not happy with the
span length, 15 -16 foot. Mr. Pebley stated that originally it was to be closer together, but
this design was at the suggestion of the fence contractor. Commissioner Schiffner asked
if there would be other supports on this 15 -16 foot span. Mr. Pebley responded in the
affirmative and explained that there would be a metal post in the middle.
Commissioner Barnes asked if the fence would be double faced. Mr. Pebley stated that
it would be the standard fencing. Chairman Wilsey referred to the City's fencing
standards and suggested a condition be added to require the wood fencing standards.
Commissioner Barnes asked if there would be any security lighting that would disrupt
neighbors. Mr. Pebley responded in the negative.
Chairman Wilsey asked staff if the conditions of approval for the previous project were
reviewed and whether there was a condition about using tex -coat or that type of material
on the building. Senior Planner Villa stated that the case file was reviewed and there
were no conditions addressing tex -coat, but a condition could be added.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that these walls would not be visible from the street.
Commissioner Barnes asked if a condition should be added to build the fence per current
standards. Chairman Wilsey stated he would agree with this. Commissioner Schiffner
asked if the condition could conform to the existing standards or another approved
method. Chairman Wilsey recommended the addition of a condition to read: "The wood
fencing shall conform to the Wood Fence Standard adopted by the City or standards
approved by the Community Development Director."
Chairman Wilsey stated the use of Oleander along the side to screen the house is
adequate; however, the Oleander suggested along Machado Street has been discussed in
the past and they do not look good and would prefer to see something more landscape
oriented. Chairman Wilsey stated that he ask staff to discuss this with the City's
Landscape Architect and come up with some alternatives. Senior Planner Villa stated this
was discussed with the City's Landscape Architect and he suggested the use of Shinny
Leaf, which grows 5 -7 feet high. Chairman Wilsey stated this material hedges very well
and there are examples on Lincoln Street. He then asked whether a condition was needed
that would proposed this material specifically and stated there is nothing addressing
Oleander, so maybe not.
Chairman Wilsey commented on the 10 -foot setback and stated that he does not have a
problem with this because the residence is quite old, on a potential commercial site, and
could be torn down in the future. Commissioner Schiffner asked about the building on
the west side. Chairman Wilsey stated the setback of concern is on the north. Mr.
Pebley stated the setback at the apartment end is 20 -feet and 22 -feet is provided.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1997
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY
UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE REVISION NO. 1 TO
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 96 -1 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO
THE 28 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH
THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS:
Condition No. '
,.,.�.,.,.,,._.._z.,.�.,�_....r
Condition No. •• fef the design _
raised landseaped fnediait alefig the frefftage ef Lakeshore
Condition No. 29: The wood fencing shall conform to the Wood Fence Standard
adopted by the City or standards approved by the Community
Development Director.
3. Review of Conditional Use Permit 96 -6 - Ink Sanity Tattoo Parlor - Jack Martin
Senior Planner Villa explained that Condition of Approval No. 2 of CUP 96 -6 required
review twelve months from the date of approval, October 16, 1996. He further explained
that according to the City's Police Department and Code Enforcement Department no
major occurrences, violations or adverse impacts have occurred. Staff recommends the
Planning Commission consider allowing continuance of use for Ink Sanity Tattoo Studio
at 31681 Riverside Drive, Suite F.
Chairman Wilsey stated that he talked to the local business owners in the area and no one
seems to have a problem. The applicant is a good neighbor and takes care of his
business. Chairman Wilsey stated that he did not have a problem with continuing the use
for five years and asked for discussion.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if there was a cost to the applicant for the review. Senior
Planner Villa stated that there was no cost for the review, but a cost for the business
license.
Chairman Wilsey noted that the applicant was in the audience and asked if there were any
questions. Mr. Martin stated that as long as there were no complaints from anyone he
had no problem.
Commissioner Schiffner stated that since there are hardly any regulations for this type of
use would like to see a requirement for periodic review. Commissioner Barnes stated
agreement and that it should be done on a yearly basis. Chairman Wilsey suggested two
years. It was the consensus of the Commission that the review period be two years.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE CONTINUANCE OF USE FOR INK
SANITY TATTOO STUDIO AT 31681 RIVERSIDE DRIVE WITH REVIEW IN
TWO YEARS, OCTOBER 15, 1999.
AT THIS TIME, 7:36 P.M. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE DESIGN
REVIEW COMMITTEE.
AT THIS TIME, 7:38 P.M. THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECONVENED.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - OCTOBER 15, 1997
STAFF COMMENTS
Senior Planner Villa reported that the City Manager will be recruiting for a Community
Development Director in the near future. Also, will recruit an Assistant Planner and Planning
Technician.
Chairman Wilsey asked if things were picking up. Senior Planner Villa stated that staff is
receiving numerous calls from architects and engineers.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Schiffner
Commented on the fence standards and stated that building supply stores now carry a u- bracket
mounted into concrete with 1/4 inch by 2 -1/2 inch iron. Asked if something like this could not
be used and as the post deteriorates it could be easily changed.
Chairman Wilsey suggested that when we are up on staff that the wood fencing standards be
reviewed again. He then commented on the fencing requirements being expensive and very
elaborate for developers.
Commissioner Sands
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Barnes
Nothing to report.
Chairman Wilsey
Nothing to report.
Commissioner Matthies
Absent.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETINKOFT LAN NING
COMMISSION AT 7:48 P.M.
AL WILSEY, CHAIRMAN
Res ectfully Sub fitted,
i—L Grind ff, Recordin Se�fe&dr
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 5, 1997
The Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Schiffner.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Sands.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER
MATTHIES, WILSEY
Also present were: Senior Planner Villa and City Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED.
1. Minutes
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes of October 15, 1997.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that the public hearings will be heard in reverse order to allow
time for the applicants of Variance 97 -5 and the Monopole to arrive.
3. Variance 97 -6 and Sign Program - Robert Gregory.
Senior Planner Villa explained that this is a proposal for a Variance for two (2)
freestanding signs to exceed the maximum sign area permitted per street frontage and
height pursuant to Section 17.94.170.I.3. (a), (b), for the Freeway Sign and Section
17.94.170.G and 17.94.170.E for the Business Identification Sign, and Signage Program
for Lake Chevrolet, at 31400 Casino Drive. He noted the square footage and stated that
the proposed project is exempt from CEQA, Class 15311(a). Senior Planner Villa stated
that staff is in favor of this proposal recognizing that auto dealers have different
advertising needs than most retail uses, therefore need the exposure to the freeway with
a different height and size. He noted the sign on Casino Drive and explained that they
will need the additional height since they will be elevating the display of cars in that area
and will need to elevate the sign. Senior Planner Villa stated that staff recommends
approval of the request for Variance 97 -6 and the Signage Program for the Lake
Chevrolet based on the findings and exhibit package attached to the staff report.
Vice Chairman Schiffner opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. He asked that anyone
interested in addressing the request to step forward. Hearing no one he then asked for
Commission consideration.
Commissioner Sands questioned the variance of the sign on Casino Drive and stated that
the original height according to the code would be satisfactory for customers to see from
Diamond Drive.
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 5, 1997
Senior Planner Villa explained that the applicant is going to have cars displayed in the
noted parking places noted on the exhibit and the area will be raised 10' to 14' high and
therefore the sign will have to be 14' to be visible.
Commissioner Barnes clarified the display of the cars
Vice Chairman Schiffner clarified the exhibit and noted his agreement with the signage.
He stated that he felt that the height will cause no obstructions and causes no problem.
Vice Chairman Schiffner closed the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE VARIANCE 97 -6 AND THE
SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR LAKE CHEVROLET BASED ON THE FINDINGS
LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
2. Variance 97 -5 and Monopole - Nextel Communication
Senior Planner Villa explained that the proposal is for a Variance to exceed the allowable
height permitted in the R -2 Zone pursuant to Section 17.24. 100 of the Municipal Code,
and Design Review for the construction of a 50' high steel Monopole and a 10' x 20'
prefabricated equipment shelter pursuant to Section 17.82.100 H.3. He further explained
that the proposed Monopole and Shelter Facility will be located on APN 373 -121 -001 and
002. He noted that the area is vacant and access to the site is .via Ridge. Road. He
further noted that the proposal is exempt from CEQA. Senior Planner Villa stated that
staff recommends approval of this proposal based on the findings and conditions.
Vice Chairman Schiffner opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. and asked anyone
interested in the project to speak.
Catherine Wyngarden, representative of Nextel Communications, presented an exhibit of
the site with an overlay to explain the need of a 50' pole instead of a 30' pole. She noted
the break -up area that occurs with a 30' pole and the maximum service area with a 50'
pole. She addressed the requirement for landscaping and noted that due to the location
of the site and the lack of water they choose to use the indigenous trees which will afford
a natural screen on the site. She noted that Condition No. 5 called for the Monopole and
associated equipment to be light gray and asked if this included the shelter and block
wall.
Senior Planner Villa stated that the intent of the condition was to address the Monopole
and the shelter and wall would be a light beige which is acceptable.. Ms. Wyngarden
confirmed that their standard color for the shelter and wall are off -white or very light
beige. Senior Planner Villa stated that it is the intent of the condition to just have the
Monopole light gray.
Commissioner Barnes questioned the relationship of the structure to the lot lines, since
there is no site plan. Senior Planner Villa stated that from the fence to the building meets
the proper set backs.
Mr. Scott Beamis, Construction Manager for Nextel Communications, stated that there
was a survey on the parcel and they will meet any requirements of the City. He clarified
the set -back. Commissioner Barnes asked if there was any grading required. Mr. Beamis
stated that there is quite a bit of grading to be done and they will meet any of the
requirements of the Engineering Department. He explained the steps to be taken prior
to setting the Monopole and placing the equipment on site. He stated that the tan color
shelter and block wall would fit better with that site, however the pole is galvanize steel
and will fade to a light gray within six months.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 5, 1997
Commissioner Schiffner clarified that Nextel was not going to paint the pole, but rather
let it gray naturally. Mr. Beamis explained that paint does not stick well to galvanized
steel, however over a period of time the galvanized steel will dull and be a light grey and
the maintenance of the pole, if painted would be frequent.
There was general discussion regarding the Monopole.
Commissioner Barnes questioned the section under Environmental which reads: The
Elsinore Water District will ensure proper environmental clearance for the additional
improvements. Commissioner Barnes asked if this applies to the project. Senior Planner
Villa stated that this sentence was included in error, and was intended for the previous
Monopole. He stated that this statement will be removed from the staff report.
Commissioner Sands stated that the area is fairly close to the small craft flight pattern and
he questioned if there was a need to have a warning light on the top of the Monopole.
Mr. Beamis explained that the FAA has made a review of their plans and approved them
as written. Senior Planner Villa explained that for poles that extend 100' it is a
requirement that they be submitted to FAA, however any pole less than 100' is not
required to submit plans.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that he is surprised that it was not required due to the
location of the proposed pole since it is at the top of the hill. He asked if FAA has
reviewed the location. Mr. Beamis stated that this was reviewed by FAA and the location
was taken under consideration.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that hearing no one else the public hearing was closed at
7:22 p.m.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE VARIANCE 97 -5 AND DESIGN
REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A STEEL MONOPOLE AND
PREFABRICATED SHELTER STRUCTURE AT APN 373 - 121 - 001,002, BASED ON
THE FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS FOUND IN THE STAFF REPORT WITH
DELETION OF THE STATEMENT UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL SECTION OF
THE STAFF REPORT WITH THAT SECTION TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
"ENVIRONMENTAL
The proposed project, the construction of a Monopole and shelter structure, are
exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15303 Class 3."
None.
ADJOURNED TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Planning Commission Meeting was adjourned to the Design Review Committee Meeting at
7:23 p.m.
The Planning Commission Meeting reconvened at 7:28 p.m.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 5, 1997
INFORMATIONAL
PLANNING COMMENTS
None.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
There was general discussion in regard to the Classic Grand Prix.
There was general discussion regarding the depth that the Monopole must go into the ground to
insure proper installation.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE
OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AT 7:40 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 19, 1997
The Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Schiffner.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Matthies.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, SCHIFFNER AND MATTHIES
* * ** ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES AND WILSEY
Also present were: Senior Planner Villa and City Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER WITH MATTHIES ABSTAINING TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED.
1. Minutes
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of November 5, 1997.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Conditional Use Permit 97 -7 - Lake Elsinore Baptist Church
Senior Planner Villa explained the request is to continue religious operations at 911 West
Graham Avenue and parking lot expansion. He further explained that the request is
categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15323 of the California Environmental Quality
Act, and staff recommends approval.
Vice Chairman Schiffner opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. asking for those wishing
to speak on the matter.
Mr. Ted Hassell, 42007 Thoroughbred Lane, Murrieta, commented on the Staff Report
with regard to the statement that no new construction will take place and explained that
the proposed site plan illustrates future restrooms and a future building. Mr. Hassell read
and presented the following letter for the record:
"November 18, 1997
City of Lake Elsinore
Planning Commission
130 South Main street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
Attention: Linda Grindstaff, Planning Coordinator
RE: CUP 97 -7, Conditional Use Permit Application
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 1997
Dear Ms. Grindstaff:
As a church member and chairman of the Long Range Planning Committee I want to
express the following concerns resulting from the meetings and correspondence conducted
in regard to CUP 97 -7.
Your letter of November 13th to Lake Elsinore Baptist Church regarding the November
19th meeting was received on November 16 and did not provide sufficient time to
research all the Municipal Codes and the conditions of approval for CUP 97 -7 prior to
the November 19th meeting. Request for copies of the LEMC codes was made on
November 17th and could not be complied with due to, insufficient counter help at the
Planning Department.
Firstly it is important to state up front that our Church is primarily interested in souls
being saved and growing in knowledge of Jesus Christ as Savior and the Lord of
mankind, especially in the Lake Elsinore area. The church neighborhood is not an
affluent area and most of the members of the church do not have jobs but are retired on
a limited income. Many members come from Murrieta, Wildomar, Perris and Sun City
and bring support to Lake Elsinore restaurants, gas stations and local businesses. We are
committed to ministry in Lake Elsinore which would also involve helping the homeless
and jobless. We desperately need young people and children to carry on this work as we
get older. Our improvements declared by the CUP 97 -7 would aid in attracting people
to share this ministry. The city would certainly benefit.
In order to accomplish the work shown on the CUP site plan it will require substantial
sacrifice of money as well as devoted time and talent, all voluntary. We presently are
heavily in debt on the property. We are not able to raise funds quickly or easily and we
need to know our future expenditures as far in advance as possible for planning purposes.
All changes, expenditures, plans, etc. are voted on by the church as a congregation and
therefore this letter only carries the weight of this one member who cannot speak for the
church.
However I am compelled to state that the 33 conditions of approval which you state shall
all be met to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director seems to be
somewhat extraordinary, if not dictatorial, especially due to the fact of being presented
to the church four days before the hearing.
To start with, no mention was made of a C high fence (condition 8) being required in two
personal meetings with the City Planner, Harold Leslie, or Armando Villa, Sr. Planner.
This is a potential problem with the neighbor who has planted large bushes and trees of
long standing. These presently provide a noise and visual screen. Your letter says a
fence is "recommended" but your conditions say "required ". Which is it?
The only requirement shown on the red marked site plan drawing was for a 20' planter,
no mention of a fence. We do not desire to lose any part of the 20' set back for a fence
because space is limited. We also do not want to have a problem or hold up due to
neighbor negotiations.
With regard to condition 13, 14, 15, the dedication of property is a major step and
certainly deserves every ounce of explanation to us on the part of the City planners.
When this property was purchased, it should have been public information that the city
was planning, supposedly, to widen Graham Street (as a deduction of your condition 33
for a median). Is that the plan? Do you honestly believe that the city would be able to
widen Graham, move buildings, widen a bridge, etc. for any such purpose within the next
10 years or longer? Do all Graham Street property owners participate in the cost? Do
you want to provide more traffic or faster traffic or what? We want people going slower
as they pass our church since the speed limit
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 1997
of 30 now is often exceeded. The city would like us to dedicate valuable land and then
pay $6,660.00 dollars for a median that may never be built. That is 10% of what we
would pay for the parking lot and that is robbery, legal or not, it is robbery. When is it
due?
Condition #2 says Scrivener Street, "will need to be repaired ". Mr. Leslie said it might
be possible that some Federal funds could be used to help in this area. I don't think our
church can or should be responsible for fixing the street or the side walk. There should
be some kind of negotiations when it comes to putting in a driveway that doesn't exist on
an alley that should not even be in use. And while on the subject of the alley, where is
my answer to previous CUP submittal correspondence on alleys? Why are you asking
for 2 1/2 feet on each side of a 15' alley on one -half of the property? For what use?
I believe Graham Street is or should be a main street in the cities thinking for the future.
We would like to be a part of the solution not the problem. However, the city needs to
understand the value of helping a church to be successful in the downtown area and not
penalizing them financially so that the church cannot function.
We could continue to operate as we have been doing for the last five years without the
CUP improvements and that may be the only option we have due to financial constraints.
However not only do we lose our future but the city would certainly lose in many ways.
We hope you appreciate all the potential loss.
Come worship with us at Thanksgiving and Christmas services so that God's love will
prevail and He will provide the changes we need within a budget we can afford.
Sincerely
Ted Hassell
Chairman of the Long Range Planning Committee
Lake Elsinore Baptist Church
911 West Graham Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530"
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked staff to address Mr. Hassell questions. Senior Planner
Villa stated these are proposed Conditions of Approval and the applicant has the right to
contest any condition felt inappropriate, and as far as Engineering's conditions would have
to defer to the City Engineer. Mr. Villa addressed condition 8 and explained that the
fence is to mitigate any glare and noise caused by vehicle parking, and the Commission
needs to consider whether this will be required or not. Mr. Hassell stated that he
understands this, but there is a 20 -foot setback that you are asking for that has to be
planted to provide the same thing. Mr. Villa stated the Commission needs to determine
whether the 20 -foot is appropriate or a fence is needed too. Mr. Hassell stated that on
the west side there is a neighbor in place that has a five -foot masonry retaining wall. We
are not going to add to his fence are we? Mr. Villa responded in the negative and stated
that these are proposed conditions of approval. Again, the Commission needs to consider
whether they will allow the 15 -foot setback with landscaping or a fence, or both. Mr.
Hassell stated that this is not a requirement but something that can be negotiated.
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked that Mr. Hassell's comments be addressed after the close
of the hearing.
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing
no further requests, the public hearing was closed at 7:16 p.m.
Commissioner Sands stated that he is not in a position to make a decision on this
proposal tonight because of the extensive conditions and the situation that has come up
with the letter.
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 1997
Commissioner Matthies stated that with the number of Conditions of Approval in question
she would not feel comfortable voting on this proposal. She then referred to the fencing,
condition 8, and asked if there were letters from the adjacent property owners consenting
to the additional traffic, building, and leaving the landscaping or if they would be willing
to work with us on the cost of a fence, if a fence was deemed necessary. Commissioner
Matthies suggested continuance.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated that he visited the site and his question pertains to the
location of the fence or wall, assumes they were talking about a wall or fence around the
property on the west side of the alley. He then stated concurrence with the other
Commissioners, not enough information and suggested continuance to a future date and
allow the applicant to work with staff.
Mr. Hassell inquired about the widening of Graham Avenue and the timing for this. Vice
Chairman Schiffner stated that the City Engineer could explain. Commissioner Matthies
requested the street name be corrected as it refers to Graham Street and it should be
Graham Avenue. City Engineer O'Donnell stated that Graham Avenue is classified as
a Major Street in the City's Circulation Element of the General Plan. Mr. O'Donnell
stated that in the future, beyond the year 2000, the traffic generated will be enough for
four lanes of traffic, and the City has a standing ordinance requiring dedication once a
building permit is applied for and this cannot be waived by the Commission, only City
Council can waive.
Vice Chairman Schiffner referred to the site plan and stated that he was unclear as to the
intent on the restroom and future building. Is this something planned in the future or is
the restroom intended to be built with this project? Mr. Hassell stated that it is planned
in the future and noted on the plan with the space given to help determine parking space
requirements.
MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 3 -0 TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -7 TO A LATER DATE
UNTIL CONCURRENCE ON THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CAN BE
FOUND.
3. Zone Change 97 -1 Revision #1; Commercial Project 97 -4 Revision #1 and Conditional
Use Permit 97 -5 Revision #1 - Argy Construction (George Smymiotis)
Senior Planner Villa provided a brief background explaining the actions taken by Planning
Commission and City Council on this proposal. Mr. Villa then explained the request
entails a Zone Change from Limited Manufacturing to General Commercial on 1.16 acres
and to Commercial Manufacturing for 1.38 acres; Design Review for the development of
a 3,255 square foot fast -food restaurant at the northwest corner of the intersection of
Riverside Drive and Collier Avenue, and; a Conditional Use Permit to allow a drive -thru
lane at the proposed restaurant. Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider an
appropriate recommendation to the City Council.
Vice Chairman Schiffner opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. asking for those wishing
to speak on the matter.
Mr. George Smyriotis, 18173 Santa Adela, Fountain Valley, stated this project was
approved by the Commission back in July and ran into problems with City Council
because of the drive -thru situation. Changes were proposed and we worked with staff and
staff has approved the changes. Mr. Smymiotis stated the project remains the same, only
the building was flipped to the north side of the property to hide the drive -tbru. Mr.
Smymiotis stated there is no disagreement with the conditions, but would request that
contribution of $8,240 for the design and construction of a raised landscape median be
postponed until the median is built.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 1997
Vice Chairman Schiffner asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing
no further requests, the public hearing was closed at 7:34 p.m.
Commissioner Sands stated that he appreciates the applicant's concern, because time is
money to him; however, it is this Commission's responsibility to ensure that proper land
use and zoning is in place and in accord with the General Plan. At times we may not all
have the pertinent facts or perhaps we sometimes over look them, some of the important
facts to enable us to make a correct decision or recommendation. One part of the request
before us tonight is to rezone 1.16 acres to C -2 and 1.38 acres to C -M Zone. It is my
feeling that the potential zoning and land use of 1.16 acres to C -2 would not be in the
best interest of the City, and not be compatible with the current General Plan. There has
been much discussion and so many different opinions rendered thus far that I personally
feel it is unwise to go forward with this project request at this time.
Commissioner Matthies stated sometimes we do not take all the facts into consideration
and we are only human and we do make mistakes. She concurred with Commissioner
Sands and stated that changing the land use would be against the City's plan, General
Plan, and would have to vote no.
Vice Chairman Schiffner stated he concurs with Commissioners Sands and Matthies, and
stated this is probably not the best land use for this property. He commented on the
number of drive -thru restaurants in the vicinity that have been approved. Vice Chairman
Schiffner stated that it is his feeling that a rezoning of the property should not be
proceeded with at this time.
Mr. Smyrniotis stated that prior to filing his application he asked City Staff if he could
do what he was thinking about and was told that he could. The project came before the
Commission and it was approved. I hope that you realize that I am out a lot of money.
Now, you tell me after four months that a mistake was made we are not going to approve
it. This does not strike me right. Mr. Smymiotis reiterated that he was told that he could
do the restaurant and bought the property, made plans and came before the Commission
and it was approved. Then the City Council was deadlocked 2 -2. Finally, we had some
workshops with City Council and they agreed that we can go ahead with this project.
Now, you say no.
Vice Chairman Schiffner explained that the Commission's recommendation will be
presented to City Council, and they will make the final decision.
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY MATTHIES TO RECOMMEND TO CITY
COUNCIL DENIAL OF ZONE CHANGE 97 -1 REVISION #1, COMMERCIAL
PROJECT 97 -4 REVISION #1 AND TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97 -5
REVISION #1.
Mr. Chris Argyrakis commented on the statement that this goes against the General Plan,
and understands that the City was going to change the zoning to C -2 a long time ago, and
asked staff if this was not correct. Senior Planner Villa stated the current General Plan
land use is Freeway Business. The Freeway Business designation is compatible with the
C -2 (General Commercial) and C -M (Commercial Manufacturing). The direction of the
City Council in 1990 was to reserve those parcels closest to the Freeway for C -2
(General Commercial) and reserve the parcels away from the freeway interchanges to C-
M (Commercial Manufacturing). In this case, the property is removed from the freeway,
so it would be C -M (Commercial Manufacturing).
THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3 -0
BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 1997
ADJOURNED TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Planning Commission Meeting adjourned to the Design Review Committee Meeting at 7:43
p.m.
The Planning Commission Meeting reconvened at 7:53 p.m.
INFORMATIONAL
PLANNING COMMENTS
Senior Planner Villa reported that Linda Miller has been hired as a temporary Planner and will
be retained for 3 -4 months. Mr. Villa stated that applications close next week for the position
of Community Development Director, and numerous applications have been received.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
Stated that he was shocked at the rebuttal letter received tonight. There was no other option, but
to delay it until it could be studied.
Commissioner Matthies
No comment.
Vice Chairman Schiffner
No comment
Commissioner Barnes
Absent
Chairman Wilsey
Absent
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:00 P.M.
k2 z V---
---4 4z -�'z
Robert Schiffner, Vice ChairrAtn-
Respectfully Submitted,
f�, s /f�ecorling
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 3, 1997
THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 3, 1997, WAS CALLED FOR LACK OF AGENDA
ITEMS.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Grindstaff
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DECEMBER 17, 1997
The Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Wilsey.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Barnes.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: SANDS, BARNES, SCHIFFNER, AND
WILSEY
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MATTHIES
Also present were: Senior Planner Villa, Assistant Planner Miller and City Engineer O'Donnell.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There being no requests to speak the Public Comment Section was closed.
CONSENT CALENDAR
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS WITH BARNES AND WILSEY
ABSTAINING ON THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 1997, TO APPROVE THE
CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED.
1. Minutes
a. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of November 19, 1997
b. Planning Commission Regular Meeting of December 3, 1997
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Tentative Parcel Man 28712 - Bernie Truax (Stein Family Trust)
Senior Planner Villa explained the request entails the subdivision of approximately 3.8
acres of commercially zone land into 3 parcels of 0.6, 1.5 and 1.7 acres. The site is
located in the vicinity of Diamond Drive /I -15 off -ramp. Mr. Villa stated that staff has
evaluated the proposed subdivision and found it to be in compliance with the C -2 Zoning
Standards. He further explained that this proposal has been analyzed in terms of the
California Environmental Quality Act and determined to be exempt, and staff
recommends Planning Commission recommend approval to City Council based on the
Findings and subject to the conditions listed in the report.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Jim Bolton, 14880 Amorose Street, representing the property owner and Mr. Truax,
provided a brief history on the site and explained that the site has been used as a mobile
home sales lot for 15 years, and the mobile home sales lot and the two -story office
building is on the same piece of property. The intent is to separate the office building
use from the mobile home sales. Mr. Bolton requested clarification on condition 8,
pertaining to connection to sewer for each lot. He stated that the office building has
sewer service; the existing use, mobile home sales, will not change so there is no need
to have a new sewer service. The applicant would be willing to add sewer service when
the need arises, when a different kind of project or use is proposed. Mr. Bolton
commented on Condition 15, pertaining to the 10 -foot dedication on Casino Drive and
explained that the office building sets within this 10 -feet, and if there is an obstruction
PAGE TWO - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1997
then the maximum dedication should be provided in order to try and accommodate an 80-
foot curb -to -curb roadway. He asked if this should not be an 80 -foot right -of -way rather
than 80 -foot curb -to -curb and stated right now it is 80 -foot right -of -way with 64 -feet
curb -to -curb. Mr. Bolton stated the owner is willing to install street improvements along
the balance of the property along Casino so this is not an issue, the issue is providing the
additional 10 -foot dedication, which the building obstructs, and the 80 -foot curb -to -curb.
Mr. Bolton commented on condition number 35, pertaining to design and construction
of slope protection along San Jacinto River and explained that this is a very expensive
undertaking, the need is not there at this point in time, and would request this be waived
or removed. Mr. Bolton then stated that he would answer any questions.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing no
further requests, the public hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m.
Commissioner Barnes stated that he agrees with Mr. Bolton's comments. He then asked
for clarification on condition 15.
City Engineer O'Donnell stated this parcel map is unusual because it has existing
buildings on land being subdivided. Mr. O'Donnell explained that condition 8 was
included because there are three lots, two have structures and one is vacant, and it is
unknown where the sewer is going to come from and an easement may be required. If
there is no easement across any piece of property then this condition is not a burden to
the applicant, it is only if the sewer has to cross another piece of property and this would
be done on the final parcel map. Commissioner Barnes asked if manufacturing housing
sales were not conducted out of one of the units, correct? If this is true, for occupancy
they need sewer connection. Mr. Bolton stated there is a sales office with a restroom
and it is on septic. Mr. O'Donnell stated this is a Building Department requirement and
not sure whether sewer connection would be required or whether the existing septic
would suffice. Chairman Wilsey asked if this could be deleted and taken up when the
property is further developed. Mr. O'Donnell suggested adding a caveat to condition 8
"prior to building permit ".
City Engineer O'Donnell commented on Condition 15, and explained that the General
Plan shows Casino Drive as a 100 -foot right -of -way, which is an Arterial, 80 -foot curb -
to -curb with 10 -foot parkways on each side. Mr. O'Donnell explained that only City
Council can waive this requirement. Chairman Wilsey asked about the parcel with the
building. Mr. O'Donnell stated that on the obstruction the City would not have them
move the building, but would have to modify the right -of -way and the condition states
to try and accommodate an 80 -foot curb -to -curb. Mr. Bolton stated that it would be their
desire to construct the street improvements on the same line as the existing street
improvements. The question is then dedication of the additional 10 -feet on the mobile
home sales property.
Discussion ensued on condition number 15 with regard to street improvements, widening
of the San Jacinto Bridge, future uses on Casino and extending Casino Drive from
Franklin over to Main Street and the need to obtain the right -of -way for this extension.
City Engineer O'Donnell commented on Condition 35, and explained that two lots front
the river and staff is asking for dedication of slopes and river bottom as a drainage
easement, as the City will own and maintain it someday. If the applicant does not install
the improvements who will? Where is the money going to come from for the City to
install the rip -rap, and it is to protect the applicant's property. Mr. O'Donnell stated this
is a heavy burden for this parcel map and these two lots; however, it is a public
improvement and the Subdivision Map Act clearly states a map shall put in public
improvements as part of an approval. Mr. O'Donnell then explained that only City
Council can waive this requirement. Chairman Wilsey asked if this could be put off until
building plans are submitted. Mr. O'Donnell stated that it could be delayed, but the
financial burden would still exist. Chairman Wilsey stated that the Commission could
recommend that condition 35 be waived.
PAGE THREE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1997
Commissioner Schiffner referred to condition 16, dedication of slopes and river bottom,
and stated that the applicant must not have a problem with this as it was not brought up.
He then commented on condition number 8, pertaining to sewer, and stated that sewer
is in both Casino Drive and Lakeshore Drive. Asked under what condition would one
be required to cross one property to serve another if there is sewer in both streets. He
stated the Building Department may require the sewer connection as a condition of
approval of this map. Also, there may be charges still due on the property for
construction of sewer. Mr. Bolton stated the previous owner dedicated property at the
corner of this property for a sewer lift station, and one of the conditions of this
dedication was that the Water District would provide him a sewer service.
Commissioner Schiffner stated he is concerned with condition number 35, realizes this
is a lot of work, but the purpose is to protect this property and not in favor of letting that
go and would like to see it remain.
Commissioner Sands stated that all of his questions have been answered.
Chairman Wilsey commented on condition 35 and suggested a recommendation be
forwarded to City Council to put off until a building permit is pulled on any one of these
parcels. Commissioner Barnes stated concurrence.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 4 -0 TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 28712 BASED ON THE FINDINGS, EXHIBIT "A" AND SUBJECT
TO THE 36 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT
WITH AMENDMENT TO CONDITION NO. 8 TO REQUIRE CONNECTION TO
PUBLIC SEWER FOR EACH LOT WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION PRIOR TO
BUILDING PERMIT, AND RECOMMEND THAT CITY COUNCIL POSTPONE
CONDITION NUMBER 35 FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SLOPE
PROTECTION ALONG THE SLOPES OF THE SAN JACINTO RIVER UNTIL A
BUILDING PERMIT IS PULLED ON ANY ONE OF THESE PARCELS.
Condition No. 8: The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot
within the subdivision prior to building permit. No service laterals
shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be delineated on
engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the EVMWD.
3. Conditional Use Permit 94 -6 Extension of Time - New Song Community Church
Assistant Planner Miller explained the request is for a three -year extension of time for
religious services at 31701 Units "D" & "E" Riverside Drive. No change in operation
is proposed, and the applicant is seeking an alternate site and is currently in negotiations.
Staff recommends granting a two -year time extension.
Chairman Wilsey opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. asking for those wishing to
speak on the matter.
Mr. Dean Murphy, Pastor of New Song, stated that they have affiliated with Calvary
Chapel and the new name is New Song Calvary Chapel. Mr. Murphy stated they are
still trying to seek a permanent facility in that area. He stated they would be happy with
a two -year parameter and continue to seek a permanent facility in that area. Mr. Murphy
stated he would answer any questions.
Chairman Wilsey asked for anyone else wishing to speak on the matter. Hearing no
further requests, the public hearing was closed at 7:35 p.m.
Commissioner Sands asked if the property was being leased and when the lease expires.
Mr. Murphy explained that the lease expired with the Conditional Use Permit; however,
leasing on a month to month basis knowing that the application is pending. Mr. Murphy
PAGE FOUR - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1997
stated they have received approval from the land owner to continue under the same
parameters operated in the past.
Commissioner Schiffner asked if there was a cost to the applicant to make a request for
an extension renewal. Senior Planner Villa explained there is a $500.00 administrative
fee for the extension. Commissioner Sands asked how many times a fee has been paid.
Senior Planner Villa explained a deposit fee was paid for the original Conditional Use
Permit and an administrative fee for the extension request.
Chairman Wilsey commented on the need to support churches in our community and
suggested granting a three -year extension. He commented on the area in which the
church is located and the high vacancy rate within the center. He reiterated that he was
in favor of a three -year extension and stated that hopefully a one -year administrative
extension can be obtained after that. He then asked how the building fund was coming.
Mr. Murphy stated their building fund was coming along well, and actively seeking an
alternate site, but would want to stay in that neighborhood.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY SANDS AND CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 4 -0 TO GRANT A THREE -YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT 94 -6, EXPIRING NOVEMBER 16, 2000, SUBJECT TO THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DATED NOVEMBER 16, 1994.
BUSINESS ITEMS
4. Addition to Single- Family Residence at 210 Davis Street
Assistant Planner Miller explained the request is for Minor Design Review of a two -story
addition consisting of 761 square feet of living area to the first floor, 289 square feet of
storage area (attached to the existing garage) and a second floor consisting of 1,050
square feet of living area. She highlighted staff concerns on the roofing material and the
need for architectural enhancement on the west facade which faces Davis Street. She
then stated the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, and
staff recommends approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report.
Chairman Wilsey noted for the record that the applicant was not present. He then asked
for discussion at the table.
Commissioner Sands commented on the west facade and stated the Historic Elsinore
Architectural Design Standards for Area 6 states that articulation of wall planes on all
sides is allowed and that large unbroken expanses of flat wall planes is not allowed. He
questioned whether to proceed on this without requesting modification on the articulation
on the west facade. Commissioner Sands then commented on the roofing material
proposed, condition 7.
Commissioner Barnes commented on the west facade and asked whether architectural
treatments other than a window would be acceptable. Assistant Planner Miller responded
in the affirmative. Commissioner Barnes stated extensive work would have to be done
to the existing structure and asked if the existing structure would not have to be brought
up to Code. City Engineer O'Donnell stated this is a question for the Building
Department. Commissioner Barnes then referred to the plan which illustrates one
bedroom with an exterior door only; however, the electrical plans illustrate an interior
door also. Inquired whether the applicant intends to use this as a rental unit only the way
it is designed and whether this is permissible. Assistant Planner Miller stated that staff
also questioned this.
Commissioner Schiffner commented on the aesthetics of the structure.
Chairman Wilsey commented on fencing, condition number 11.
PAGE FIVE - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1997
MOVED BY WILSEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 4 -0 TO DENY THE ADDITION TO A SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 210
DAVIS STREET DUE TO AESTHETIC CONCERNS.
5. Sign Program for Arco AM /PM Mini -mart at Four Corners - Ron Satter
Senior Planner Villa explained that Condition of Approval #23 of Commercial Project
95 -5, Arco AM /PM Mini -mart located at southwest corner of Riverside Drive and
Lakeshore Drive, requires the submittal and approval of a Sign Program, and this
proposal is to comply with that condition. The Sign Program contains criteria for three
wall signs, one freestanding monument sign, and four freestanding directional signs, and
as proposed meets all development criteria. Staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Schiffner stated there is a typographical error in the staff report under
Environmental Setting, the Barber Shop is not vacant. He then stated the applicant is
building a beautiful structure, thrilled to see it coming along, will be happy to see it
open, and as far as signs are concerned when this is in operation that he won't have signs
hanging all over like he did with the other building.
Commissioner Sands stated he would like to commend the 7 -11 stores on the program
they are implementing on the safe and legal sale of age restricted products.
Commissioner Barnes stated concurrence with Commissioner Schiffner on the use and
attractiveness of the structure. He then asked if this signage is in conformance with State
requirements for advertisement of gasoline prices or whether additional signage would
have to be put up. Mr. Thomas Wrigle, RHL Design Group, 1201 South Beach Blvd.,
Suite 207, La Habra, stated this signage does meet the criteria for lettering height and
should be easily visible from both driveways which would comply with State
requirements.
Mr. Wrigle stated he would like to address the canopy and monument signs. He stated
the staff report did not include the signs on the canopy in the calculations. Arco is
modifying their logo to the sparks, illustrated on rendering posted. Arco is requesting
a 1' 9" square sign on each end of the canopy. The monument sign is listed as 6' and
the base needs to be about 4" higher in order to incorporate the Lake Elsinore logo, so
we are looking for that to be about 6' 4 ".
A brief discussion ensued on the monument sign with regard to height, incorporation of
the Lake Elsinore logo, and whether a variance would be required for the four - inches.
MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY BARNES AND CARRIED BY A VOTE
OF 4 -0 TO APPROVE THE SIGN PROGRAM FOR ARCO AM /PM MINI -MART
AT FOUR CORNERS WITH THE SIGN HEIGHT ILLUSTRATED ON EXHIBIT
"Bn
ADJOURNED TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Planning Commission Meeting adjourned to the Design Review Committee Meeting at 8:01
p.m.
The Planning Commission Meeting reconvened at 8:03 p.m.
PLANNING COMMENTS
Senior Planner Villa stated there is a church on Graham that wants to expand to the building
next door, 107 Graham. They will be coming before the Design Review Committee requesting
consideration on this expansion.
PAGE SIX - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1997
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
Commissioner Sands
No comment.
Commissioner Barnes
Stated the program proposed by 7 -11 is a great idea and hopes it works out. Wished everyone
Merry Christmas.
Vice Chairman Schiffner
Asked if there was a Joint Study Session on the 14th of January. Chairman Wilsey stated that
notification would come after the first of the year.
Chairman Wilsey
Wished everyone Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Commissioner Matthies
Absent
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SANDS, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS
VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING AT 8:10 P.M.
l /
Al Wilsey, Chairman
Respectfully Submitted,
Linda f, Recording ary