Loading...
01/07/1993 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 7. 1993 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on January 7, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Jim Sims. PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Chairman Jim Sims, Vice-Chairman Moire Huss, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Doug Wilson, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director Maria C. Muett, Associate Planner Larry Mainez, Planning Technician Maggie Alford, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner PLEDGE: Doug Wilson, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Commissioner Wilson volunteered to represent the Planning Commission on the General Plan Task Force. Preliminary discussion with regard to Draft Air Quality Element. The Planning Director stated that Village Deli has fixed their windows but their signs are not working. Brief discussion with regard to drainage in the area of the proposed Pico Park site. Discussion regarding Colton Circulation Element with regard to enlarging the I-215/Washington area. 1 Commissioner Wilson suggested using the vacant lot between 22675 Barton and Valley Bank as a parking lot. ( ) Discussion of the possibility of a recession-related interim policy for temporary use permits for the Barton Road Specific Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:03 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:03 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None. ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1992 Chairman Buchanan stated that the intent for the Pico Park condition regarding handicap spaces was to increase to three, not add three additional spaces. MOTION PCM-93-01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 17, 1992 Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve the December 17, 1992 minutes as amended. Commissioner Van Gelder seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-01 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Commissioner Hargrave absent. ITEM #2 DU-92-01 ANNETTE PATRICIA GRISAFE 22430 BARTON ROAD (LA TIJERA BEAUTY AND BARBER SHOP) G.T. DETERMINATION OF USE FOR A MASSAGE TECHNICIAN IN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL SUBAREA OF THE BARTON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN The Associate Planner presented the staff report. 2 7:11 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING 6J �. 1 7:11 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION PCM-93-02 DU-92-01 Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve DU-92-01. Chairman Buchanan seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-02 Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Commissioner Hargrave absent. Commissioner Wilson abstained. ITEM #3 BUSINESS RESOLUTION POLICY PROCEDURE REQUESTING EXTENSION FROM 30 TO 45 CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITHIN A 90 DAY PERIOD FOR DISPLAY OF TEMPORARY BANNERS AND r' SPECIAL EVENT SIGNS IN THE COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND R2/R3 ZONE DISTRICTS. ALSO A $50 FEE REDUCTION. ZONING AMENDMENT TO FOLLOW AT A LATER DATE The Planning Director presented the staff report. Commissioner Van Gelder felt they should request that businesses remove window signs if they put up banners. Clarification of time period that banners would be allowed to stay up. Staff and the Commission discussed fee amount. 7:46 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING 7:46 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Munson felt if the fees remained higher, the applicants would take more pride in their banners. `J 3 MOTION PCM-93-03 BUSINESS RESOLUTION Commissioner Munson made a motion to delete Item 3 from the resolution regarding decrease in fee. Commissioner Van Gelder seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-03 Motion fails. 2-4-1-0. Commissioners Munson and Van Gelder voted yes. Commissioner Hargrave absent. Staff and the Commission discussed amending Item 2 from the resolution in order to give more power to the Planning Director. Commissioner Van Gelder felt it was necessary to create a new item that addresses multi-family residential districts. MOTION PCM-93-04 BUSINESS RESOLUTION Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion that it be added to Item 2 of the resolution that this resolution and subsequent ordinances replace and supersede any previous policies or custom with regard to temporary signage in the multi-family residential district, and that in any district, the size, number, location and quality of signs are subject to review and approval by the Planning Director with the standard appeal process. The Planning Director mentioned Commissioner Van Gelder's request to offer an incentive to businesses that once banners are put up, they are to . reduce window signs, stating that this could be added as Item 5 of the resolution. Commissioner Van Gelder concurred. Chairman Buchanan seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-04 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Commissioner Hargrave absent. 4 MOTION PCM-93-05 BUSINESS RESOLUTION Chairman Buchanan made a motion for recommendation of approval of the resolution as amended. Commissioner Wilson seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-92-05 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Commissioner Hargrave absent. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:59 P.M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 7:59 P.M. ITEM #4 SA-92-15 RAY AND LINDA FUERTE 22424 TANAGER AVENUE G.T. AN. APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A ROOM ADDITION/GAME ROOM AND BALCONY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE R1-7.2 ZONE The Planning Technician presented the staff report. The Planning Director presented an overall rationale she-has been using to review this type of project: TWO-STORY ADDITIONS IN PERSPECTIVE When these additions produce the following results, they are recommended for approval by the Planning Department: 1. Maintain and enhance property values by maintaining and upgrading the existing housing stock: Rehabilitating utility systems Roofs i - 5 Drainage systems Installation of more modem features, i.e.larger restrooms, high + ceilings, etc. 2. Provide various housing types at affordable rates to Grand Terrace residents. A new house with three bedrooms and a large family room would cost approximately $180,000 to $190,000, and not $140,000. 3. Aesthetic value and continuity. When projects do not just consist of a square addition over exterior bearing walls but resemble the largest floor plan in the subdivision. This includes having similar roof lines, colors, materials, proportion of windows, doors, etc. 4. Disruption of neighbors privacy is minimal. Projects' characteristics are evaluated on a one-to-one basis according to its particular surroundings. A new house in a neighborhood may have positive impacts on neighbors who start painting and rehabilitating their houses as well. Each developer or homeowner cares about its own project; our role is to care for the public good - the whole picture. Positive and negative impacts need to balance out and end up pending on the positive side. 8:10 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING MICHAEL E. SAENZ 22439 FLAMINGO G.T. Mr. Saenz said he has resided at this residence since 1977, more specifically, since the inception of this particular housing tract. He objected to the addition of the room in question primarily from the standpoint of privacy, but more specifically, the noise factor, which was not mentioned in this study, which he believes would result in a devaluation of his property. He said his other neighbors have similar opinions. He stated that the Planning Department report mentioned there were sufficient pleas for privacy. He said the majority of the trees are currently on his land - 3 Hollywood Junipers 6 which are in pretty bad shape, and he doesn't believe they will sustain ! '. themselves too much longer. He felt, based on living there and that the applicants have a lot of parties, this would add to the noise level they are currently receiving. He said he would modify his stance if some of his recommendations were considered. One recommendation was to have the applicant place more trees to absorb any noise resulting from more.parties, as he assumed with the second story being a game room, they will,invite more people. He said he would like the applicant to put forth money into building a new fence. He felt that if he should sell his house, the fact that there will not be the kind of privacy people would welcome due to a second story looking into his backyard, the value of his house would devaluate. RICH MISPAGEL 22847 WREN G.T. Mr. Mispagel said he bought a house at 22429 Flamingo, and the applicant will be able to look into his backyard. He said he has been using this house as a rental for five years, and one of his tenants did complain, but since he does not live there, he can not verify the parties. He said when the pool was put in prior to these people owning it, someone allowed them to put the pool too high, so when anyone jumps in the pool, the water flows under his fence and down his hill, which killed everything growing on the hill. He wants ` another block wall put in and to raise the height of the berm like it was when he bought the house so that when it rains heavily or when people use their pool, their water will at least go out through their property rather than his. He said he has no other complaints, however, he agrees that the property value of his house will go down. He said if he was looking for a house and there was a balcony looking in the backyard, it would lower the value. He said he would at least like a block wall put in from that comer behind his property, and he would like it to be raised enough so that when they use their pool, the water will drain through their property. RAY FLTFRTE 22424 TANAGER G.T. Mr. Fuerte said asked, with regard to the block wall, if the neighbors were willing to go 1/2 and 1/2 or if they wanted to put up the fence himself. Vice-Chairman Sims said that his comments need to be directed to the Commission. 7 Mr.Fuerte commented that, regarding Mr. Saenz' statement that the addition would lower his property value, this is not what they are trying to do. He said he is trying to improve his property, not bring it down, also considering some of the homes are rentals and some aren't even being kept up. As far as "game room and bar", this was bad wording on their part on the first plan, stating it is supposed to be a family room and countertop. He said Mr. Saenz said they have a history of loud parties continuing well into the night, and they have lived in Grand Terrace for twelve years, and up until now, they have never had anyone from the Sheriffs Department come to their house with a complaint. He said they called the Sheriffs Department when they first saw this comment and explained the situation, and they said they have never received a complaint on their address. He said with regard to the pool, 'it had already been built when.they moved in, and from what he can see the water seems to drain toward the street, but if he wants it, he will put some kind of a berm there. Commissioner Munson asked about the air conditioning for the addition. Mr. Fuerte said he would probably have to put a bigger unit on the ground. Commissioner Munson asked if he would be adverse to a condition that would require no unit on the roof. Mr. Fuerte said his existing one is on the ground. Commissioner Munson asked_about the trees on his property. Mr. Fuerte said he has a fig tree, an apricot tree and a lemon tree. Commissioner Munson said these are small trees. Mr. Fuerte said his lemon tree is about 12' to 13' high. Chairman Buchanan asked, in the event that his neighbors to the rear of the property were interested in jointly putting up a 6' block.wall, if he would be willing to participate in this,to which Mr.Fuerte responded in the affirmative. Vice-Chairman Sims asked if the main purpose of the balcony was for viewing. Mr. Fuerte said this is what they had in mind, for viewing the lights of Colton and San Bernardino. He said if the balcony will be a problem, they are willing to do away with it. 8 Vice-Chairman Sims asked if they intended to put furniture on the balcony, to which Mr. Fuerte responded in the negative. 8:30 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Staff and the Commission discussed comparables with relation to the valuation of the surrounding homes. Vice-Chairman Sims expressed concern that the surrounding homes are one- story homes. MOTION PCM-93-06 SA-92-15 Commissioner Munson made a motion to add to Condition#9 any equipment remain on the ground. Vice-Chairman Sims seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-06 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Commissioner Hargrave absent. Chairman Buchanan asked for feedback from staff regarding a block wall requirement if the neighbors agree to contribute to the cost. The Planning Director said they couldn't enforce this because they couldn't make sure the neighbors pay. Chairman Buchanan suggested limiting the requirement that he build one subject to their contribution of 50% of the cost, and there is no reason the City ought to be mediating this. He said the applicant has already indicated a willingness to replace the fence with a block wall if the neighbors are contributing their share of the cost. Vice-Chairman Sims said he would like to be sensitive to the privacy issue, and the applicant said he would be willing to eliminate the balcony. MOTION PCM-93-07 SA-92-15 -' 9 Vice-Chairman Sims made a motion that the balcony be eliminated from the floor plan on the project. Commissioner Munson seconded. i MOTION VOTE PCM-93-07 Motion fails. 2-5-1-0. Vice-Chairman Sims and Commissioner Munson voted yes. Commissioner Hargrave absent. The Commission discussed the privacy issue with regard to the existing trees and fencing. MOTION PCM-93-08 SA-92-15 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to add as a condition that a 6' fence be required to replace all existing 4' fencing. Commissioner Huss seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-08 Motion carries. 5-1-1-0. Chairman Buchanan voted no. Commissioner Hargrave absent. MOTION PCM-93-09 SA-92-15 Commissioner Wilson made a motion to approve SA-92-15 as amended. Commissioner Van Gelder seconded. MOTION VOTE PCM-93-09 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Commissioner Hargrave absent. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 8:51 P.M. 10 NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON JANUARY 21, 1993. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, Patrizia Materassi Dan Buchanan Planning Director Chairman, Planning Commission 01-11-93:ma t c:\wp51\planning\minutes\01-07-93.m 11