Loading...
12/20/2001 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 20, 2001 The reqular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on December 20, 2001, at 7:00 p.m., by Chairperson Fran Van Gelder. PRESENT: Fran Van Gelder, Chairperson Doug Wilson, Vice Chairperson Brian Whitley, Commissioner John Lampe, Associate Planner Michelle Boustedt, CEDD Secretary ABSENT: Matthew Addington, Commissioner Mary Trainor, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, CEDD Director 7:02 P.M. CONVENE.SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Whitley Roll Call • Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by the Chairman. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written request to be agendized to the Director of Community and Economic Development. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: NONE 1 ITEMS: 1. MINUTES Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 15, 2001 RECOMMENDATION: Approval MOTION: PC-36-2001 Chair Van Gelder made a motion to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated November 15, 2001. Commissioner Whitley seconded the motion MOTION VOTE: Approved 3-0-0-2. PC-36-2001 Commissioner Addington absent. Commissioner Trainor absent. 2. G PA-01-01 E-01-10 Proposal to update and revised the "Housing Element" of the General Plan of the City of Grand Terrace. APPLICANT: City of Grand Terrace — Department of Community and Economic Development. LOCATION: Citywide RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, but continue the hearing to the meeting of January 17, 2002. Planning Associate Lampe reported that the process of updating the City's General Plan is under way. The Housing Element of the General Plan is also in the process of being updated and revised. The Public Hearing for the revision of the Housing Element was advertised and noticed for this meeting; however, because of the Holiday's and the need to complete the revised element, Staff is recommending that we continue this item to the next meeting of January 17, 2002. The complete Staff Report together with the revised Housing Element will be provided to the Commission prior to the next meeting. The consultant, Joann Lombardo will be present to make the Staff presentation and, recommendations of the proposed revised Housing Element. Chair Van Gelder opened up the Public Hearing and invited the public to speak before the Commission. 2 MOTION: Chair Van Gelder moved to continue the Housing PC-37-2001 Element to the next scheduled Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Wilson seconded the motion MOTION VOTE Approved 3-0-0-2. PC-37-2001: Commissioner Addington absent Commissioner Trainor absent 3. Z-01-01, E-01-07 Proposed Ordinance to Revised the Second Family Unit Provisions to Allow a Second, Full-sized, Single Family Residence in the Multi-Family Zones; and E- 01-01, a Proposed Negative Declaration that Said Ordinance will not have a Significant Impact on the Environment. APPLICANT: City of Grand Terrace — Department of Community and Economic Development. LOCATION: Citywide RECOMMENDATION: Review proposed changes to the Ordinance to Amend the Second Family Unit Provisions and to allow a Second Full Sized Single Family Unit in the Multifamily Residential Zones and recommend that the City. Council approve the Proposed Ordinance, as modified, and adopt the proposed Negative Declaration. Planning Associate Lampe reported that at the Planning Commission meeting held on November 15, 2001, the Commission requested the Staff to bring back the proposed Second Family Unit Ordinance incorporating changes discussed and agreed to by the Commission. At the previous meeting, the Commission had approved two motions. The first Motion was that the percentage of living area be consistent with the minimum 400 square feet so that any size of house may be allowed to have an attached second family unit with a minimum 400 square foot size. The second Motion was that the Staff was to address cases in which an attached unit on a lot that is larger than the minimum required area by 25% should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. If there were potential for negative impacts upon adjacent neighbors or the neighborhood, Staff would bring the application to the Planning Commission for review and approval. 3 In response to these Motions, the Staff amended Section 18.06.82, in which the proposed Ordinance relates to the definition of a Second Family Unit. The 400 square foot minimum requirement has been removed and has tied the 400 square foot minimum requirement to an efficiency unit, which is defined in the uniform building code. The excerpt of the building code was included for reference in the Staff Report as Attachment 2. The Staff felt that this was a more logical minimum cut-off-than the original 400 square feet. In Addition, in order to allow any house to have at least an efficiency type unit, we are recommending that an additional provision be added to the Ordinance that in Section 1869050C, which reads as follows: Any Single-family detached dwelling regardless of the size of the living area may have at-least an attached efficiency unit as defined by the Uniform Building Code, provided all of the requirements in this Ordinance are met. Staff believes that these particular changes satisfy the intent of the first motion that was made by the Commission to modify the Ordinance. In response to the second Motion to review the proposed attached units on a case- by-case basis related to lot size, the Staff modified Section 18.69.050.13 to reflect the language;which now reads as follows: The floor area of the second family unit shall not exceed 30% of the living area of the existing main dwelling where the unit is attached, excepting that on lots 25% greater than the minimum required area or larger, on a case by case review, the Community and Economic Development Director may permit a greater percentage of the living area as long as it is determined that there will be no adverse effects on the adjacent parcels or the community. If the Director cannot make such a determination, the matter may be referred to the Planning Commission, per Section 18.69.080. In addition, the floor area of the Second family unit shall not exceed 10% of the subject site where the unit is detached. In no instance shall any second family unit exceed 1200 square feet in size or be smaller than an area to provide for an efficiency unit as defined by the Uniform Building Code. Staff has incorporated this language into the proposed Ordinance reflecting each motion of the Commission. The Staff has presented the above as Option 1. Mrs. Robinson of Stonewood Construction came to the original Hearing and made some recommendations. One of Ms. Robinson's comments was to tie the size of the unit to the size of the lot. Both attached and detached should be tied solely to the size of the lot. The Staff had some concerns with this proposal as situations may arise where small residences will end up with an attached single-family unit to the rear larger than the main residence. This would encourage more of a duplex type of development rather than the second family unit. - This Option was presented as Option 2 of the Staff Report. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the proposed revised Second Family Unit with Option 1 as discussed; also, to call upon the City Council to adopt the proposed Ordinance based on the recommendation and findings that this proposed Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan and all other applicable requirements of local Ordinances and the State Law and that the proposed 4 Ordinance will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of { residences within the City. Chair Van Gelder asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Whitley asked Planning Associate Lampe with regard to Option 1: Is there an upper limit in terms of the discretion of the Economic Development Director on the size of a single family unit? Would it be the Commission's pleasure to consider some type of a parameter to serve as a guide as to what would be an acceptable percentage or upper unit? Commissioner Wilson pointed out to Commission Whitley that on Page 4 of the second portion of the Staff Report, a parameter or upper limit of 1,200 square feet has been given. Commissioner Whitley indicated that his questions were satisfactorily answered. MOTION PC-38-2001: Commissioner Wilson made a motion to approve the Second Family Unit Ordinance to include Option 1. Commissioner Whitley seconded the motion. MOTION VOTE PC-38-2001: Approved 3-0-0-1. Commissioner Addington absent Commissioner Trainor absent ADJOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION • Information from Commissioners Commissioner Wilson reported that there is a homeowner on the East side of Preston Street that has a temporary chain link fence in the front yard and has had it for quite awhile now. Planning Associate Lampe replied that Code Enforcement Department is aware of the issue and is currently researching the City's code. Chair Van Gelder wanted to know the status of the KEEP Program. 5 Planning Associate Lampe informed the Commission of the meeting that was held on December 19, 2001 to provide further information to business owners. Six interested parties have inquired about the program so far; and one business owner has submitted the required paperwork. • Information to Commissioners Planning Associate Lampe reported the status of the La Mesa RV Center. The City is working with the company to build a new facility. The La Mancha building has been improved, and a new tenant will be moving in by the end of the year. Joanne Lombardo is working on the housing element and will be presenting it to the Commission at the next Planning Commission Meeting. ADJOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION AT 7:32 PM NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 17, 2002 Respectfully Submitted, Approved By, Jgqn Lampe, Associate Planner Fran Van Gelder, Chairperson FcV Patrizia Materassi Planning Commission Community and Economic Development 6