Planning Commission Meeting

Planning Commission 11/10/15 4638 CITY OF ESCONDIDO MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ESCONDIDO PLANNING COMMISSION November 10, 2015 The meeting of the Escondido Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice-chairman McQuead in the City Council Chambers, 201 North Broadway, Escondido, California. Commissioners present: Bob McQuead, Vice-chairman; Ed Hale, Commissioner; Gregory Johns, Commissioner; Don Romo, Commissioner; and James Spann, Commissioner. (One position vacant). Commissioners absent: Jeffery Weber, Chairman. Staff present: Bill Martin, Assistant Planning Director; Jay Paul, Associate Planner; Ann DoImage, Associate Planner; Owen Tunnel!, Principal Engineer; 11•••••••• Homi Namdari, Assistant City Engineer; Adam Phillips, Deputy City Attorney; and Ty Paulson, Minutes Clerk. MINUTES: Moved by Commissioner Romo, seconded by Commissioner Spann, to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2015 meeting. Motion carried. Ayes: Spann, Romo, McQuead, and Johns. Noes: None. Abstained: Hale. (4-0-1) WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS — Received. FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS — None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS — None. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. PLOT PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT -- ADM 13-0127 and ENV 13-0009: REQUEST: A Plot Plan to redevelop a 3.7-acre site into a new shopping center, to include a 43,500-SF grocery store, a 3,200-SF quick-service restaurant with 4639 Planning Commission 11/10/15 drive-through, and associated parking (199 spaces), landscaping, lighting, and utilities. Access to the project site would be via three driveways on West Lincoln Avenue; no access would be provided from North Broadway or State Route 78. The project would also include a master sign program for all building signage, a 20'-high pylon sign in the southeastern portion of the property, a 6'-high monument sign at the southwest corner of West Lincoln Avenue and North Broadway, and another 6'-high monument sign at the middle driveway on West Lincoln Avenue. The project site was formerly the location of Toyota of Escondido until the dealership moved in 2007. All remaining dealership structures would be demolished and the site graded prior to development of the shopping center. The proposal also includes the adoption of the environmental determination prepared for the project. LOCATION: On the west side of North Broadway, between West Lincoln Avenue and State Route 78, addressed as 925 North Broadway. Ann DoImage, Associate Planner, referenced the staff report and noted staff recommended approval of the proposed project and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Discussion ensued regarding a clarification of the number of ADTs created by Lincoln Elementary School. Additional discussions ensued regarding the proposed location of the loading zone for students and the peak hours for traffic in the area. Vice-chairman McQuead and staff discussed the noise impacts from Highway 78. Commissioner Hale and staff discussed hypothetical situations related to traffic if a larger restaurant was proposed. Jim Simmons, Escondido, applicant, Pacific Development Partners, LLC, noted that the proposed size for the restaurant was based on the needed space for Starbucks. He provided an overview of the student drop-off and pick-up activities, noting that the peak times for the market would not conflict with the school hours. He indicated that they had spent significant time with Caltrans in order to interphase the traffic lights at Lincoln and Highway 78 so as to reduce the impacts on traffic. He then provided a handout with highlighted sections of the Engineering conditions of approval that they were requesting modifications to. Vice-chairman McQuead asked Mr. Simmons if staff was aware of his proposed modifications to the conditions of approval. Mr. Simmons replied in the Planning Commission 11/10/15 4640 affirmative, noting that most of the issues had to do with traffic and the ability to afford to implement the improvements while meeting the project requirements. Mr. Simmons referenced Page 31, Traffic Engineering Condition 1a and b and asked that the Commission recommend to City Council help with the process for traffic impact fees. He referenced Traffic Engineering Condition 1d, noting that they just received this from staff today that the project be conditioned to relocate the utility pole. He asked that this condition be removed, feeling striping would mitigate any issues. He referenced Page 32, Condition No. 2 and noted this had been resolved with staff and Ca!trans. He referenced Page 34, Cash Securities and Fees Condition No. 2 and 4 and noted that they had worked this out with staff today. He then referenced Page 32, Condition No. 3 and noted that their understanding was that they would repair any damage done to the street. Mr. Simmons then noted that he had some individuals who turned in speaker slips who were in favor of the project and did not wish to speak. Vice-chairman McQuead noted that all of the fee-related items were the purview of the City Council and not the Planning Commission. Mr. Simmons noted that he was requesting the Commission recommend City Council consider the items he brought to the Commission. Mr. Namdari noted that staff was in discussions with the applicant regarding final traffic designs that would fulfill the mitigation measures agreed to by the applicant. Vice-chairman McQuead noted that Mark Burger, Lars Anderson, Willy Kim, and Jason Greminger turned in speaker slips in favor of the project. Pete Nguyen, Escondido, asked if the tenant for grocery story was known and whether the project would include a pharmacy. Ms. DoImage noted that this information was not known yet. Commissioner Hale questioned whether approval of staffs recommendation meant the applicant would have to come back to the Commission to modify the mitigation measures. Mr. Namdari noted that staff was in negotiations with the applicant regarding final design and the fee credits. Commissioner Romo asked Mr. Simmons if Traffic Engineering Condition No. 1d was present last month. Mr. Simmons noted that the part regarding relocating the pole was not in the condition last month. He also noted that they were in negotiations with staff at the current time. 4641 Planning Commission 11/10/15 Commissioner Hale expressed his concern with sending this forward to City Council without a clear resolution of the mitigation measure regarding the pole removal. Mr. Simmons stated that relocating the pole had just came to fruition today, noting his view that they would have time to work with staff before it went to City Council. Mr. Namdari explained that the condition was subject to the requirements of the City Engineer, noting that this provided the latitude to create the safest condition while working with the applicant. Commissioner Spann concurred with the City Engineer having the latitude to determine what was best for the subject project, noting that the area was already inundated with heavy congestion and school traffic. He also recommended that the trash enclosure be graffiti coated and that the aesthetics in this area be upscale since it was a gateway to the City. Commissioner Johns and staff discussed traffic impacts for right-turn traffic from Lincoln Avenue onto Fig Street. Commissioner Hale asked if the rooftop equipment would be screened. Mr. Martin replied in the affirmative and noted this could be added as a condition. Commissioner Hale stated that the landscape plan needed to be high quality due to this being an entry corridor to the City. ACTION: Moved by Commissioner Hale, seconded by Commissioner Romo, to approve staffs recommendation. The motion included revising Police Condition No. 3 to state that graffiti resistant paint shall be used on the trash enclosures and building exteriors. The motion also included adding a condition that roof top equipment shall be screened to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) 2. MODIFICATION TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — PHG 14-0035 and ENV 15-0014: REQUEST: A modification to the Conditional Use Permit for Westminster Theological Seminary to add 9.17 acres to the existing 8.58 acre Westminster Theological Seminary Campus. The project includes construction of 72 units of graduate student housing on the New South Campus site, which includes nine Planning Commission 11/10/15 4642 two-story buildings with 16 one-bedroom units, 24 two-bedroom units and 32 three-bedroom units (72 total units). The proposed project also includes a one-story 2,200 square foot commons building on the New South Campus site and a two-story 11,147 square foot education building on the original campus site. Grading Exemptions are requested for the overall grading design that includes a combination of cut and fill slopes, with cut slopes up to approximately 31 feet in height towards the northern portion of the site, and fill slope up to 26 feet in height towards the southwestern portion of the site and fill slopes ranging from approximately 12 feet to 20 feet in height along the southern boundary of the site. Combination cut and fill slopes up to 32 feet in height also are requested within the western area of the site to accommodate the proposed storm water features/detention and treatment basins and new access driveway. Primary access to the project would be provided from the existing driveway access from Boyle Avenue. Secondary gated emergency access would be proved from Via Alegre on the eastern side of the site. The proposal also includes the adoption of the environmental determination prepared for the project. LOCATION: On the eastern side of Bear Valley Parkway, south of Boyle Avenue, north of Birch Avenue. Westminster Theological Seminary includes the existing 8.58-acre campus ("Existing Campus") addressed as 1725 Bear Valley Parkway (APN 234-030-34) and the proposed addition of the 9.17-acre vacant parcel adjacent on the southern side of the Existing Campus (APN 234-030-14) referred to as the "New South Campus." Jay Paul, Associate Planner, referenced the staff report and noted staff issues were whether the proposed number of student housing units, along with the mass and scale of the buildings and grading design was compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. Staff recommended approval based on the following: 1) Staff believed student housing would be an appropriate use for the site and compatible with adjacent residential uses and would not result in adverse noise or visual impacts because the project provided appropriate building setbacks from adjacent residential uses and extensive landscape buffers along the perimeter of the site to soften views of the new buildings, as well as to provide privacy for the adjacent residents. The student housing units would not create any adverse noise impacts because the project has been designed to concentrate within the interior of the project, within wall courtyard areas or within the buildings. The school would not create circulation or parking problems because the facility is not anticipated to generate a significant amount of vehicle trips, sufficient on-site parking would be provided, and the adjacent roadways could accommodate the additional trips due to the new roadway and intersection improvements currently under construction along Bear Valley Parkway. 4643 Planning Commission 11/10/15 Discussion ensued regarding a clarification of the elevations of the proposed buildings and type of retention basin being proposed. Additional discussion ensued regarding whether covered parking was being provided. Dave Ferguson, representing the applicant, noted that due to the 9 acres becoming available the project was able to spread out the campus and provide more buffering and open space. He then introduced Mr. McArthur to the Commission. Marcus McArthur, Westminster Seminary, thanked the City for its good relations with Westminster Seminary. He provided the background history for Westminster Seminary and its activities. He noted that they were a graduate school with the average age of students being 31. He stated that they currently had 139 students from 17 states and 33 countries as well as having over 1100 alumni. He elaborated that the project would provide needed onsite student housing. Mr. McArthur stated that they had held a neighborhood meeting and as a result they had improved the project for both. He then thanked City staff for their help as well as the Commission for considering the project. John Owens, Escondido, and Mr. Paul discussed the proposed setbacks. Mr. Owens expressed his general concern with losing the rural atmosphere and the area being too congested. Charlie Yank, Escondido, noted that his property bordered the entire northeast soccer field. He and Mr. Paul then discussed the proposed plans for this area. Mr. Yank asked what the noise impacts would be to his property. Mr. Paul noted that the noise impacts would be the same as a residential use, noting that the project's activity centers were centralized in the interior of the site. Mr. Yang asked if the existing trees located between his property and the subject project would be taken out. Mr. Ferguson replied in the negative. Mr. Ferguson noted that they had received some comments this evening regarding installing a street light near the entrance and a yield sign near the exit, noting that they had no issue with these requests. ACTION: Moved by Commissioner Spann, seconded by Commissioner Romo, to approve staffs recommendation. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) LT Planning Commission 11/10/15 4644 CURRENT BUSINESS: None. ORAL COMMUNATIONS: None. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Mr. Martin noted that the next meeting would be held on December 8 th. ADJOURNMENT: Vice-chairman McQuead adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. The next meeting was scheduled for December 8, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 201 North Broadw , Escondido, California. Bill Martin, Secretary to the Escondido Ty Pa\ulsOn, Minutes Clerk Planning Commission