Loading...
03-07-2006 PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes CITY OF CHINO HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES MARCH 7, 2006 CHINO HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 2001 GRAND AVENUE CHINO HILLS, CALIFORNIA COMMISSIONERS PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Mike Braun Douglas La Belle Adam EliasonJames DeStefano Abraham Hovsepian Bradley E. Wohlenberg Art Bennett Winston Ward Karen Bristow Garry Cohoe Jeff Adams Henry Noh Steve Nix Dawn Vierheilig COMMISSIONERS ABSENT None The Planning Commission Meeting of March 7, 2006, was called to order at 7:00 PM by Chairman Bristow, who then led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. ITEM #4 - PUBLIC COMMENTS None ITEM #5 - CONSENT CALENDAR a. Minutes: December 20, 2005; January 3, 2006 COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission approved Item 5a. MOTION: Bennett SECOND: Eliason AYES: Braun, Eliason, Hovsepian, Bennett, Bristow NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Hovsepian on Minutes of 12/20/05 and Bristow on Minutes of 1/3/06 (not in attendance) Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 1 ITEM #6 - ACTION ITEMS None ITEM #7 - PUBLIC HEARING a. CASE NO: Site Plan Review .04SPRO3, 04SPRO4 and associated Sign Program, 04SPR06; Tentative Parcel Map 17543; and Development Agreement. (Continued from 2/7/06) OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Chino Hills and Opus West Corporation (Opus) PROPOSAL: The project involves the following five components: (1) Site Plan Review for the Shoppes Retail Center with approximately 360,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, service and office building area on 26.18 acres, ancillary surface parking and accompanying sign program; (2) Site Plan Review for the Shoppes Residential with 190 multifamily dwelling units on 9.38 acres and ancillary surface parking; plus a Mixed Use component consisting of 18 multifamily dwelling units and approximately 4,147 square feet of retail, with ancillary parking garage space; (3) Site Plan Review for the Park Residential with 96 multifamily dwelling units on 6.78 acres, plus ancillary surface parking; (4) Development Agreement between the City of Chino Hills and Opus; and (5) Tentative Parcel Map 17543. LOCATION: Shoppes Retail Center Site: Generally southeast corner of Grand Avenue and Peyton Drive; Shoppes Residential and Mixed Use Component Site: Generally southeast corner of Grand Avenue and Peyton Drive; and Park Residential Site: , Northwest corner of the intersection of Eucalyptus Avenue and Peyton Drive. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the, Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving Site Plan Review 04SPRO3, 04SPR04 and associated sign program, 04SPR06, and Tentative Parcel Map 17543. Staff also recommends that the Planning Commission table the Development Agreement for further review. Community Development Director James DeStefano introduced special staff in attendance — City Manager Douglas La Belle, City Engineer Garry Cohoe, and Mr. Jeff Hill of Opus with his staff. In August 2005, the Planning Commission and the City Council held public hearings. In late August, both bodies approved the project, which set forth land uses, and development standards for the areas. Tonight, staff will present details on the site plans, architecture, signs, etc. Senior Planner Henry Noh presented the staff report, which is on file in the Community Development Department. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 .2 • Vice Chairman Bennett spoke about loft offices and wondered if parking was adequate along the bulk of retail (front of stores)/office. Senior Planner Noh responded that all office/retail/restaurant uses were combined. Additional parking spaces will be provided for the Civic Center, and could be shared. Senior Planner Noh explained that the intent of retail is for shoppers to find parking anywhere they can and then walk through the pedestrian friendly area to the Shoppes in order to get the full flavor and experience. Vice Chairman Bennett asked about impervious surface and whether it would accommodate the 15 percent landscape requirement. Senior Planner Noh said there would be clarifiers and they would be large enough to hold storm runoff. Commissioner Hovsepian asked about 1,400 office spaces and wanted to know if it included on street angled parking on private streets, to which Senior Planner Noh responded affirmatively. Commissioner Hovsepian asked how the City was able to get around the maximum height issue with this project and Senior Planner Noh explained that the Specific Plan allows architectural features to go to 80 feet. Vice Chairman Bennett wanted to know the number of pad sites for restaurants. Senior Planner Noh responded six (6) along Grand Avenue and Peyton Drive. Vice Chairman Bennett wanted to know if the long-term goal was to sell off restaurant pads individually. Senior Planner Noh said that Opus would address this question. Commissioner Hovsepian asked if the sign could read, "Shoppes at City of Chino Hills" rather than "The Shoppes." Senior Planner Noh referred to the City emblem and told the Planning Commissioners that they could make such a request of the developer. Community Development Director DeStefano interjected that a lot of effort and thought went into this effort and through marketing efforts, shop owners and others will know that this project is in Chino Hills. It will be highly visible and marketable and to a great extent staff defers to the developer. The signs will include Chino Hills and the development will be heavily marketed as a Chino Hills development. Commissioner Eliason felt it was general knowledge and clearly understood that Chino Hills was a City and not a suburb of Chino. Everyone knows "The Shoppes at Chino Hills" is in Chino Hills and he prefers to leave the name as is. Commissioner Eliason asked about Monument Sign 1. Senior Planner Noh explained that it was a radius and that it would go around the corner of the signalized intersection, at new ring road and Grand Ave. Vice Chairman Bennett asked about landscaping and stacking and Senior Planner Noh responded. Commissioner Eliason asked how Monument Sign 2 would appear and Senior Planner Noh explained that it too was a radius sign that would extend around the corner. Commissioner Eliason asked if it was appropriate to discuss traffic flow tonight. Community Development Director DeStefano explained that tonight's discussion was intended to focus on architecture, site plans, and so forth and if the Commissioners had questions staff would respond. However, questions regarding traffic were addressed in August 2005. Commissioner Eliason said at that time there was no specific site plan and felt that the Commission should discuss traffic flow coming into the project at various points to ensure sufficient stacking and ensure good traffic flow through the center. Traffic flow has been a concern for most shopping centers. There are two restaurants at one entrance. Commissioner Eliason wanted an explanation about the possibility of traffic bottlenecking at that location as well as in the area of the Peyton entrance. Chairman Bristow agreed with Commissioner Eliason. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 3 Chairman Bristow asked the developer to speak about botanical trees in his presentation. Commissioner Hovsepian asked about ,Conditions . of ,Approvval .and in particular, about deliveries. Normally deliveries'are required .to cease,at 10 p-.m: and he felt 12:00 midnight seemed a little too late for deliveries. He wanted to know•how the City would enforce the prohibition of residential parking,in driveways because the condition refers to the applicant and his successor and he felt the City should have a voice in approving any future owners. City Engineer Garry Cohoe stated that an internal traffic analysis was conducted for Peyton and Grand, and in accordance with•the analysis, including a queue analysis; the City laid the drive aisles to make sure the queue would not back up. According to industry standards the site _ should operate efficiently. Senior Planner Noh interjected that the two restaurants were sit- down facilities, which would result in less congestion than the fast food facilities at the entrance to the shopping center on Grand in Chino for example. Commissioner Braun asked about worst-case scenario and City Engineer Cohoe responded that the worst area at Peyton and Grand was a level of service D. City Engineer Cohoe stated that the City is mitigating the intersection and it remains at a level of service D even with the mitigation. Community Development Director DeStefano stated the area was more comparable to the Target Center in Chino between Applebee's and Black Angus. City Engineer Cohoe said the original analysis was done on 550,000 square feet of retail and the retail area has been reduced to 360,000 square feet, which should improve the situation. Community Development Director DeStefano stated that with respect to deliveries, this is an isolated retail project. Other than the new adjacent residential, any other residential is quite far away. It is a center with no specific tenants, and staff was trying to provide service in the broadest manner to provide for future tenant uses. Regarding parking spaces within garages, Community Development Director DeStefano said the future HOA would likely serve as its own policing entity and doubted that the City would be checking garages. Assistant City Attorney Bradley Wohlenberg interjected that this condition is an enforcement mechanism for the City. Community Development Director DeStefano said the City selects the waste hauler and added that it is a standard condition to ensure the waste hauler is consistent with the City's agreements. Community Development Director DeStefano stated that in regard to successor in interest, often one team will present a project and it will ultimately be owned and managed by a different entity. He reminded the Planning Commissioners that they should focus on the land uses and in this case the site plans and architecture on the land uses. Ownership will most likely change over time. In a contractual agreement there are often clauses for City approval of successor in interest; however, the Commission is not considering the Development Agreement tonight. Commissioner Eliason interjected that some of the nicest homes are across the street from this project and the City should be considerate about the delivery and trash hauling hours. Chairman Bristow stated that the main gate opened to the Post Office and was located at the signal. She thought the Post Office would buffer the sound and maybe only one or two homes would be impacted. Vice Chairman Bennett interjected that the two homes are already impacted by the Payne Ranch Center that lies even closer to their homes. Jeff Hill, Opus West, stated that the goal of the project was to create an urban town center environment and it was difficult to compare this project to other retail because the only similar Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 4 " project in the Inland Empire was Victoria Gardens in Rancho Cucamonga. From a traffic flow standpoint, the applicant worked with City Engineer Cohoe to create a ring road of traffic around the project with two lanes in and two lanes out of the project. The ring road continues from the entrance on around the residential area and the Civic Center connecting back to Peyton. In terms of hours of delivery, the challenge is that this is an urban project with restaurants open until 10 p.m. The applicant agreed that all trash and parking lot sweeping would be done during the day. The post office will act as a sound buffer. The park is open until 10 p.m. now, and there are often sporting events taking place. The applicant's consultant measured all parking spaces and studied other urban centers. As a result, the restaurants are pushed to the street to invite people in and give them a main street feel. Vice Chairman Bennett inquired whether there would be storefronts all around the buildings and where the trash receptacles would be located. Mr. Hill explained that there was no backside to the projects because it would be architecturally enhanced. Architecturally, the backside will be toned down because retailers want to invite people to the front of the building. Some users will have both back and front doors for the public and there will be passageways (paseos) that go through the buildings so people can walk from the parking to the interior front of the project. The trash enclosures will meet City standards and be screened and landscaped. The areas of the project that face Grand Avenue and Peyton will not have back doors. Vice Chairman Bennett inquired about lighting and security. Mr. Hill said that the applicant was working on a security plan with the Sheriff's department and the consultant for Victoria Gardens. The paseos will be fairly well lighted and open and security will be provided. Mr. Hill said it was intended that all businesses with the exception of the restaurants would open and close at the same time. Commissioner Hovsepian inquired about project economics in regard to the decrease in size. Mr. Hill said that Opus had originally sought a maximum square footage they thought would fit the site. The project has been downsized to what the Planning Commission is considering for the past nine months and the City Manager's revenue projections are correct based on the current square footage of 350,000 to 375,000 square feet. City Manager Douglas La Belle stated that the City is the applicant for both residential components and further indicated that at some point in the future the properties would be declared surplus and would be marketed and sold to the highest bidder. The parking structure would provide added leverage because the City owns the property. And as the City enters into negotiations its position will be enhanced as far as future use of the property. When the City conducted the environmental impact studies for the project the study revealed that the project would allow for more square footage and higher density than the actual approved plan. The studies were conducted in order to evaluate the worst-case scenario. Sales tax and property tax projections for the retail remain the same at $1.5 million per year at full build-out. The government center is now at design and will be out to bid in July or August of this year with construction on the four government center buildings to commence in September or October. The parking structure will provide expansion capabilities for the City's government center and the parking structure will allow expansion of the library, community center or some other type of facility, as well as 2,500 square feet of additional area in the City Hall. Additionally, there is 4,500 square feet of retail space in the retail portion adjacent to the parking structure. Both areas will be available for future expansion areas for City government activities. Control of the Development Agreement is an important part of negotiations. There is a list of potential tenants allowed in the center in specific locations and as the Development Agreement moves forward, Commissioner's questions should be answered. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 5 • Vice Chairman Bennett asked for confirmation that the City would get entitlement for the residential development if there were no intention of developing. City Manager La Belle responded that the City would, as the landowner, sell it to a merchant builder or builders. Commissioner Hovsepian asked if the City would get 10 percent of the commercial taxes. City Manager La Belle responded affirmatively and stated that commercial was 15 percent and residential was 10 percent. In fact, the City is assuming this for the Regency center on Soquel Canyon. In response to Commissioner Hovsepian, City Manager La Belle explained that the Commons is already within the commercial entitlement zone and the City would get the property tax benefit. Chairman Bristow inquired about landscaping and the rendering showing what appeared to be large palms. City Planner Jeff Adams explained that they were Bottle Trees, Koluteria and Golden Rain Trees. There was also an Ornamental Pear on one of the streets. Commissioner Braun asked if affordable housing applied to this project to which City Manager La Belle responded that it did. Vice Chairman Bennett asked whether the 18 homes in or adjacent to the retail would be developed or sold off as entitlements and be built in conjunction with the retail project. City Manager La Belle responded that the plan was to market these along with the residential entitlement across the street. Whoever the City ultimately selected for the portion of the project would also build the live/work units in front of the parking structure, and in all likelihood, the retail shell that would be conveyed back to the City with the City becoming the leasing agent. In response to Commissioner Hovsepian, City Manager La Belle stated that the plan was for the Government center construction to commence initially and that the dirt from that site would be spread on the Government center site.to the.residential site. The Cityfis,attempting to stage it so that all of the activity occurs simultaneously. The City hopes to award the park project in April, and next April is when Opus constructs the retail project and the residential can begin at about the same time. Vice Chairman Bennett inquired. about the dirt stockpiled on the park residential site. City Manager La Belle stated that the stockpiled,dirt and the dirt behind the Post Office would provide about 80 percent of the fill for the entire project. The dirt behind the Post Office came from the Fieldstone project and the dirt on the park residential came from the park site. • Commissioner Braun inquired whether the nationwide housing slowdown would affect this project and City Manager La Belle responded that it would not hurt viability of the project but could affect timing for marketing of the residential property. If this were the case it might be prudent to delay the sale of one or both parcels for a period of time however short term it might be. City Manager La Belle assured the Planning Commission that if there were a short-term hold on the residential parcels, the remainder of the project would move forward. City Manager La Belle said that the daytime population would not be the driving force behind the retail success and that the live/work component was an added benefit. • Chairman Bristow opened the Public Hearing. Marty Schaeffer, 17425 Jessica Lane, Chino Hills, stated that he was in favor of the project, however, was concerned about the traffic. On Grand Avenue to the north of the project there have been continual increases in traffic. There used to be a turn by Pick Up Sticks restaurant Planning Commission Minutes-March 7, 2006 6 and since that was eliminated the area is more dangerous than ever. Mr. Schaeffer was concerned about the traffic on Peyton and inquired whether the extra Church traffic on Sundays had been considered. He rides his bicycle on Peyton on Sundays and has to take a detour because there are private cones in the road and drivers exit rapidly from the church parking lot causing him to be concerned for his safety. He further stated that drivers make illegal left turns to turn in and drop off mail at the Post Office. Commissioner Eliason concurred that the Church generated a lot of traffic and wanted to know if the Civic Center might have reciprocal parking for the Church. City Engineer Cohoe responded that the agreement would allow the church to utilize the government center parking area on Sunday. He explained the configuration and upgrades that would allow for parking and safe crossing from the library side to the Church. Commissioner Eliason said the problem was getting in and out of the parking area when the Catholic Church was holding services. The ring road would be one source of controlling traffic. City Engineer Cohoe responded that the church would have other driveways that would tie into the library parking lot as well as City Center Drive with a left turn onto Peyton or right turn onto Grand Avenue. City Engineer Cohoe said the plan would be to include an entrance on Ring Road. City Manager La Belle explained the proposed layout of the area and the location of the library, city hall next to the library, the parking structure that backs up to the post office and the location of the proposed residential. The parking lot matches up with the adjacent parking area. He confirmed that there would be no residential on Peyton. Vice Chairman Bennett asked about the festival and City Manager La Belle said it would change the character of the festival because the rear parking lot would be expanded with the understanding that there would be reciprocal parking. Sometimes the City will use the church's parking for overflow parking and on occasion the festival will use the City's. Chairman Bristow closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Eliason stated that the retro look was nice and he was glad that it had returned to popularity because he felt it would encourage families to come out, stroll and enjoy their time in the space. He loved the concept and thought it would be great for sales tax dollars. He thought the public would linger longer and spend more money in Chino Hills. He also liked the live/work concept and was not too disappointed when Robinson's May dropped out because he believed it would now be a better project with greater opportunity for specialty shops. Chairman Bristow stated that this project had been a long time coming. The community was anxious to have it completed and she felt it would be well received. She felt that the detailed paperwork was quite good. COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission adopted a resolution approving Site Plan Review 04SPR03, 04SPR04 and associated sign program, 04SPR06, and Tentative Parcel Map 17543. The Planning Commission also tabled the Development Agreement for further review. • Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 7 MOTION: Eliason SECOND: Bennett AYES: Braun, Eliason, Hovsepian, Bennett, Bristow- • NOES: None ABSENT: None iF' I _ b. CASE NO: General Plan Amendment 05GPA02 and Zone Change 05ZCO1, Tentative Tract Map No. 17653 and Design Review No. 284. (Continued from 2/21/06) • J OWNER/APPLICANT: Fieldstone Communities, Inc. PROPOSAL: A subdivision of 3.18-acre portion of the larger 10.33-acre property into 27 single-family residential lots and four lettered lots for open space purposes (Edison easement including trail and landscape). Four lettered lots (Lots A, B, C & D, a portion of Pomona Rincon Rd.) are for private streets. The residential lot sizes range from 4,950 square feet to 12,275 square feet. A General Plan Amendment to change a portion of the property from a commercial to RM-1 land use designation and a concurrent Zone Change to re-zone the same portion from commercial to Planned Development PD 97-01. LOCATION: The site is generally located on the northwest corner of Los Serranos Country Club Drive and Soquel Canyon Parkway. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 05GPA02, and adoption of Zone Change 05ZC01, approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 17653 and Design Review #284, based on the findings of facts as listed in the resolution and subject to the conditions of approval. City Planner Adams presented the staff report, which is on file in the Community Development Department. Vice Chairman Bennett asked if there were any issues with lot coverage ratios. City Planner Adams responded that the houses were consistent with the lot size and spaces within Higgins Ranch. Chairman Bristow asked how this project tracks with Measure U. City Planner Adams responded that the requirement was not increasing the density. Originally there were 12 units proposed. Area b was low density residential which allowed 15 units and 12 are being proposed for each of the areas a and b. There are 27 units proposed for the entire area. City Planner Adams said that the left over units would go to no one and he did not believe they could be used on another property. Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg concurred that it would have to be a concurrent transfer. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 8 Commissioner Eliason asked about the 3,746 square foot plan with respect to the floor plan entrance. The entry door is 6 to 8 feet recessed between a den and a garage and he was concerned about lighting. Commissioner Eliason said he would like the address numbering on the far left of the house near the garage moved closer to the front door because it is usual to homes in Chino Hills. Assistant Community Development Director Winston Ward responded that the Fire District would condition the address to the correct location and require that the numbers be lighted. Chairman Bristow opened the Public Hearing. Raymond deAvila, Fieldstone, 2600 Canto Rompeolas, San Clemente said he was excited to get the project to this point. He said that he had a presentation, but instead would be available to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have. He stated that canned lighting would be located in the recessed area about which Commissioner Eliason was concerned. Marty Schaeffer, 17425 Jessica Lane, Chino Hills, inquired whether home addresses were also required on curbs, to which Assistant Community Development Director Ward responded in the negative. He believed homes over 3,000 square feet would have more than two cars and this development required only two car garages which he felt would enhance traffic problems. Vice Chairman Bennett informed Mr. Schaeffer that this project was grandfathered in and parking requirements were not greater when this project was proposed. Therefore, the developer is allowed to build this size home on this size lot. Mary Joy, 15781 Sedona Drive, Chino Hills, commended Fieldstone on educating surrounding residents about the project. She asked how "grandfathering" impacts the land for the project. City Planner Adams responded that zoning for the project is the same as zoning for her property and this project was approved when her home was approved. She asked if her back yard would appear larger than this development and said that residents were glad this was not a high-density project. She mentioned that residents do not like to see vacant dirt lots like those in the Weeda Triangle and she is hoping that due to zone changes someone would build on the dirt lots. She wanted to know when and by whom it will be built and she wanted the builder to follow Canterra plans from Lennar to be consistent with the neighborhood. City Planner Adams responded that Lennar still owned the property and that they were concerned about the easements. He was not sure if they would build or sell off the three'lots but they should move forward at this point. City Planner Adams said it was not to the applicant's economic advantage to leave the lots vacant. Vice Chairman Bennett asked if Ms. Joy had an HOA and suggested she talk with her HOA board. She responded that the association had been trying to buy the land. Ray deAvila stated that he explored the Lennar situation and got same story that City Planner Adams relayed that it would be foolish for the developer to let the land sit vacant. In response to Mr. Schaeffer he said that two of the units have the capacity for a three-car garage and other units have extended workshops. He said he would provide people with an option for extra storage or garage and that there should be plenty of room for parking. Chairman Bristow closed the Public Hearing. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 9 Vice Chairman Bennett said it would be a tasteful development and compatible with adjacent property. COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 05GPA02, and adoption of Zone Change 05ZCO1, approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 17653 and Design Review #284, based on the findings of facts as listed in the resolution and subject to the approved conditions of approval. MOTION: Bennett SECOND: Braun AYES: Braun, Eliason, Hovsepian, Bennett, Bristow NOES: None ABSENT: None RECESS: Chairman Bristow called for a five (5) minute recess at 9:10 p.m. RECONVENE: Chairman Bristow reconvened the meeting at 9:15 p.m. ITEM #8 - STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Introduction of the Vila Borba Project Community Development Director DeStefano stated that the Vila Borba project was probably the largest development to come before the Planning Commission in several years and that staff thought it appropriate.to bring the project forward as an introduction'. He added that the public hearing had been scheduled and that public notices had been sent for the public hearing on March 21, 2006. Community Development Director DeStefano further stated that staff had transmitted a large package to the,Planning Commission containing information about the Vila Borba project and added that these same materials were to be used for the public hearing in two weeks. Assistant City Attorney`Wohlenberg explained that this was intended to be a presentation by staff to the Planning Commission to send information one way. Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg stated that the project was not noticed as a public hearing and therefore, there was no intent to have a discussion amongst Commissioners or questions of staff at this time. Community Development Director DeStefano introduced City Planner Adams. City Planner Adams introduced the project by presenting a report to the Commission, as well as a Power Point presentation, both of which are on file in the Community Development Department. Commissioner Eliason inquired about private streets, to which City Planner Adams responded that following the passage of 218; the City requires private streets for maintenance reasons. Vice Chairman Bennett inquired whether the Edison easement would be discussed at the next meeting, to which City Planner Adams responded in the affirmative. City Planner Adams also affirmed that the project would be directly behind Pine Corporate Center. Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 10 • ITEM #9 - COMMISSION INFORMATION a. City Council Unofficial Action Agenda of February 28, 2006 ITEM #10 - COMMISSIONER COMMENTS None ITEM #11 - STAFF COMMENTS None The Planning Commission Meeting of March 7, 2006 was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Dawn Vierheilig Planning Commission Secretary APPROVED AT PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 16 2006 CITY OF CHINO HILLS Planning Commission Minutes—March 7, 2006 11