Loading...
11/03/198612-8.1066 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 3, 1986 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92324 on November 3, 1986 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Caouette. PRESENT: Norman T. Caouette, Chairman Jerry Hawkinson, Vice -Chairman Gerald Cole, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Daniel McHugh, Commissioner Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Joseph Kicak, Planning Director Lynn Halligan, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Ray Munson, Commissioner Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Led by Vice -Chairman Hawkinson Prior to discussion of Item IA, Vice -Chairman Hawkinson asked the Chairman to allow him to address, for the record, statements that were made by the City Council at their last City Council meeting. Vice -Chairman Hawkinson stated that it was indicated that the Planning Commission had held up the applicant for Arco Mini -Market Convenience Store for two years. Pointed out that this statement was not true. Stated that the applicant was granted a Conditional Use Permit about two years ago; and after it expired, was given a new Conditional Use Permit about 2 months ago. Also, the Planning Commission was accused of holding up the applicant for his Site & Architectural Review. Stated that the Planning Commission had simply requested the applicant to see if his Company would bend a little on the colors. Vice -Chairman Hawkinson stated that the Planning Commission was a volunteer group and felt that they were efficient. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued item from Planning Commission Meeting of October 20, 1986. Tentative Tract Map 13364, Specific Plan 86-4, Conditional Use Permit 86-7 and Site & Architectural Review 86-11 for Terrace Groves Apartments. Chairman Caouette asked for staff presentation. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, presented staff report. Stated that there was an attachment to the Staff Report that proposes a new circulation through the project. The attachment shows that the circulation of the project is restricted within the project area to use Mt. Vernon and Canal Street. It does not encourage traffic to go out through the A-P development to Barton Road. Pointed out that Condition #44, referencing fees that will be paid and specific amounts, should be changed to read: that the fees, as specified by Ordinance and/or Resolution, shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. Stated that staff recommended that the project be approved, subject to the conditions as stated within the staff report. Also, recommended approval of the conceptual landscape plan, subject to Planning Commission review of detailed landscaping, lighting and irrigation plans at a future date. Chairman Caoutte asked if there were any questions of staff. Discussion took place between Chairman Caouette, Vice -Chairman Hawkinson and Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, regarding a proposed fee for traffic signalization. Mr. Kicak stated that if the City Council takes action on imposing a fee for traffic signals, then it would be applicable at the time the building permit is issued. Chairman Caouette confirmed with Mr. Kicak that the Condition #44 change regarding fees would be included in the Staff Report and that no action would be required by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Hargrave asked Staff to review the conceptual drawing submitted by the applicant that proposed to discourage ingress and egress in the emergency access drive. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, responded that the roadway that is now proposed for cul-de-saccing had been proposed to be a public roadway coming out to Barton Road. Stated that the internal circulation would be through Britton Way from Mt. Vernon and access across the Gage Canal. The emergency access would be constructed in such a manner that would provide emergency vehicle access, if necessary, from that particular area, but not necessarily the only source for emergency vehicles. The primary access would be from Mt. Vernon and Canal Street. The roadway, which is now Britton Way would continue westerly and would still provide access to the A-P parcel to the south and access to the parcel that fronts on Barton Road. Commissioner Hargrave asked Mr. Kicak what form of barrier is proposed. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that instead of a full 8" curb, it would probably be a depressed curb to a 4" curb with some greenery in between the two. Discussion took place between Commissioner Hargrave and Joseph P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 2 Kicak, Planning Director, regarding the parking area in the southerly portion of Lot 20. Mr. Kicak stated that the parking area in the southerly portion of Lot 20 would be for the benefit of the properties that are now zoned and utilized as A-P. Stated that it would be the additional parking that is required for the A-P development. Commissioner Hargrave asked if that parking lot would belong to the residents of Lot 20 or to the Professional Center. Mr. Kicak responded that, at this time, the owner of the Professional Center and Lot 20 are the same. And, that if Lot 20 should be sold, there would be an easement provided for parking stalls or some other form of covenant running with the land that would provide access for the parcel from the A-P Center to parking on Lot 20. In response to Commissioner Hargrave's question regarding who would have priority for parking, Mr. Kicak confirmed that it would be on a first come first serve basis. Commissioner Hargrave asked if changes had been made to the Tentative Tract Map 13364 on Lots 3, 9, and 10, which do not meet minimum width, as required. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the map does not reflect the changes at this time. Stated that in his discussion with Mr. Mauerhan, the applicant, he had told Mr. Mauerhan that this was a condition that must be satisfied. And, unless that condition was satisfied, that the map would not be approved as final. Mr. Kicak stated that Mr. Mauerhan had no problem in meeting that condition. Commissioner Hargrave stated that since the majority of traffic from the development would probably utilize the Canal Street for access to Barton Road, asked if the widening of Canal Street southerly to Barton Road should be a condition of this development. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the staff would would request that the improvements on the westerly side of Canal Street be completed all the way down to Barton Road. Stated that the owner had expressed concern over the costs of relocating the existing power poles that would be required in conjunction with the widening. Also, stated it has not yet been determined if those poles are in an easement with prior rights or under franchise. If they are under franchise and the City undertook the project, the City could request the Edison Company to relocate those poles. And, that there may be a chance that the Edison Company would relocate the poles. But, even if it is not under franchise, it is a condition of the development and the responsibility of the developer to relocate those poles. Stated that staff is recommending that as a condition. In response to Commissioner Hargrave's question regarding P.G. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 3 whether the City has actual ownership for the widening of Canal Street, Mr. Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the agreement between the City and Gage Canal Company and the City of Riverside, at this time, will provide adequate land for the widening in accordance with the master plan of streets. Commissioner Hargrave asked Staff if the C.C. & R.'s should address the rights and responsibilities of the individual owners with respect to maintenance responsibilities, if common driveways are permitted. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, concurred with this statement. Mr. Kicak stated that the C.C. & R.'s would be brought in by the applicant prior to approval of the final tract map and would address all of the issues to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. Stated that this should be a Condition of Approval. Discussion took place between the Planning Commission and Planning Staff regarding trash enclosures. Mr. Kicak stated that there is a condition that requires trash enclosures, but that they have not been addressed on the plans. Chairman Caouette asked if there were any other questions of staff. Being none, asked the applicant and/or his representative if they would care to address the Commission. �j Bill Mauerhan, 53 Royal St. George, Newport Beach, CA., �J Applicant. Stated that they have a plan that includes the trash enclosures. Stated that they are behind the units at the end, and that they are a size that meets the require- ments for width, depth and also location. Mr. Mauerhan also stated that they have no problem furnishing maintenance agreements for ingress and egress on the common driveways. Chairman Caouette asked the applicant about his reference to consideration by the City in moving the power poles along the Canal Street. Bill Mauerhan stated that the poles will be required to be moved 10 ft. back to the curb. And, depending if they are main transmission lines and there is enough slack in those lines to move them back, it may not be a problem. However, stated that if there are guy wires and perhaps a request for some steel poles, the cost could be astronomical. Stated that he has hopes that the City has some rights and that Edison does not have a fixed easement. Asked if the City Street Improvement Funds could be involved in that. Chairman Caouette stated that the Planning Commission could not commit the City to spending any of their funds. P.G. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 4 Mr. Mauerhan, applicant, asked if the project to the north would have the same problem with improvements on Canal Street and the poles. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the problems are identical. Stated that the poles would have to be relocated along the frontage and the same would be true for the project to the north. Mr. Mauerhan stated that along their frontage there were about 5 or 6 guy wires and would be a big problem. Did not know how a 6.9 acre development could be hampered with all the costs. Commissioner Hargrave stated that he felt that this is something the applicant would have to contend with and perhaps come back later to address that particular issue separately. Bill Mauerhan agreed that if curb and gutter goes in the poles would have to be moved. But, felt that there should be some equal sharing of costs with the property owners up and down Canal Street that are going to use it. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that Mr. Mauerhan was addressing the property owners on the westerly side of Canal Street and not necessarily the easterly side. Commissioner Hargrave stated his appreciation of the fact that this issue was of concern to the applicant, but that this would have to be done and that a condition had been put on the project. Stated that this was because that road would not sustain the traffic that will come down it, unless there is an extension. Further discussion continued between the applicant and the Commission regarding alternatives for paying for the relocation of the power poles. Mr. Kicak, Planning Director, stated that this would be a matter for the City Council to decide. The only way the Edison Company will relocate the poles, at no cost to the City, would be if it was a City project and if they did not have prior rights. Mr. Kicak explained that by prior rights, means that Edison was in there prior to Canal Street being a public right of way. Discussion took place between Commissioner Hargrave and Mr. Mauerhan, applicant, regarding ingress and egress for parking on Lot 20. Mr. Mauerhan stated that Lot 20 would have an easement on it for ingress/egress and parking in favor of the A-P commercial property owner. This would be on the deed and it would also have a maintenance agreement, so there would not be any conflict. Commissioner Hargrave P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 5 stated, with Mr. Mauerhan confirming, that according to the easement that parking would belong to the Professional Center. And, that if there was ever a problem that the unit owners on Lot 20 would have secondary right to the parking spaces. Mr. Bill Mauerhan stated that the rights of each owner would be spelled out in a legal document. Mr. Mauerhan also stated that the responsibility of maintenance for Lot 20 could be the responsibility of the Professional Center or Lot 20. Because, there will be a joint agreement for ingress/ egress and parking which would include maintenance. Commissioner Hargrave asked the applicant who he would suggest have responsibility of maintenance. Mr. Mauerhan stated that it could be either one, it would not matter. Chairman Caouette asked Staff if the C.C. & R.'s associated with this project, as discussed earlier, would address the maintenance of Lot 20 parking area. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, responded that it could, but felt it should be a separate issue. Commissioner Hargrave stated that as it stands now, if the Planning Commission does not take any further action, that parking areas, south of Lot 20, would belong to the Professional Center. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that as it is shown on the plan, the 24 parking spaces belong to Lot 20. Stated that the Fee Title, as it stands now, would go with Lot 20. Discussion took place between Commissioner Van Gelder and the applicant, Mr. Mauerhan, regarding block walls. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the applicant was going to landscape both sides of the block wall. Mr. Mauerhan responded that if it is a 6' block wall, that typically it would not be planted on the other side of the block wall. Stated that usually the block wall would be within 4" to 2" of the property line and the landscaping would be on their side. And, that when the development on the other side develops, that developer would landscape their side. Commissioner Van Gelder asked who would be responsible for the landscaping maintenance inside the project. Mr. Mauerhan stated that it would be their project's responsibility for maintenance of landscaping. And, then the individual owners would maintain their own landscaping after all the units were filled. Mr. Mauerhan stated that it would not be uncommon to set up a landscaping association or agreement for landscaping maintenance for all 20 lots. This agreement or association could be set up at the time of purchase. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if Mr. Mauerhan planned on doing just that. Mr. Mauerhan responded that they had not planned to, and would rather not get into dictating to the owners, how P.G. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 6 to maintain their property. Stated that the owners would not want a run down development because they want to rent it. Chairman Caouette asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Being none, opened the public hearing for this item. Asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to this project. Being no one, Chairman Caouette closed the public hearing and returned the item back to the Commission for discussion. PCM 86-104 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave and seconded by Commissioner Van Gelder and passed by a 6-0 vote to add Condition #45 to Conditions of Approval to read: That C.C. & R.'s shall address the rights and responsibilities of the individual parcel owners with respect to various facilities that are jointly used. Also, that said C.C. & R.'s are to be to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and shall be completed prior to approval of the final tract map. Commissioner Hargrave asked Mr. Kicak if traffic signalization should be a condition of approval or if this should be recommended to the City Council. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, responded that the Planning Commission can recommend to the City Council that traffic signalization be looked at, the costs associated, and how that would be distributed in the form of Capital Improvement Fund Fees. Or, the traffic study for the whole triangle, which would include Canal Street, Mt. Vernon Avenue and Barton Road, which was done about 1 1/2 - 2 years ago, that addressed the costs and specific ratios that were assigned to that whole area based on the number of units and traffic generation. In response to Vice -Chairman Hawkinson's statement that he felt this was done at the last Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Kicak stated that was his understanding. That the Planning Commission had directed Staff to go to the City Council to initiate some type of fee for traffic signals. Mr. Kicak further stated that this should be incorporated within the Staff Report that is transmitted from the Planning Commission to the City Council at the time the Tentative Tract Map and Specific Plan are to be considered. Commissioner Hargrave asked that the Condition of Approval #22 regarding the construction of block walls be set aside until the Planning Commission has their study session. This is in order to discuss the need for construction of the block wall ' P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 7 as required in Condition #22. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that a perimeter block wall will be required on the westerly side of the project, adjacent to the Gage Canal. However, the other walls may be addressed at the time of detailed Site & Architectural Review. PCM 86-105 Motion by Commissioner McHugh and seconded by Vice -Chairman Hawkinson and passed by a 6-0 vote to add Condition #46 to read: To improve the Westerly side of Canal Street adjacent to the property all the way down to Barton Road as required, and must be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Chairman Caouette asked staff if Condition #45, as stated for C.C. & R.'s, would cover the maintenance of Britton Way or would it be necessary to add another condition. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the C.C. & R.'s for this project should include the responsibilities for the driveways and landscape maintenance. Stated that the Planning Commission may want to restate Condition #45 to read that C.C. & R.'s cover all the covenants with respect to various facilities that are jointly used, to be approved by the City Attorney. PCM 86-106 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave and seconded by Commissioner Van Gelder and passed by a 6-0 vote to restate Condition #45 to read: That C.C. & R.'s shall address the rights and responsibi- lities of the individual parcel owners with respect to maintenance, landscaping and shall cover all of the covenants with respect to the various facilities that are jointly used. Also, that said C.C. & R.'s are to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and shall be completed prior to approval of the final tract map. Commissioner McHugh asked staff how the parking restrictions on Britton Way would be handled, if the City does not accept the dedication. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, responded that the City Attorney would need to get involved. Stated that the developer intends to offer Britton Way for dedication. However, it would be the Staff's recommendation not to accept Britton Way as a public roadway and remain a private roadway. Stated that this may need to be included in the C.C. & R.'s because the City and P.G. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 8 Sheriff, without a dedicated street, may not have the power to enforce a no -parking regulation on it. Bill Mauerhan, applicant, stated that they would draft an agreement to give to the City Attorney allowing the City whatever is needed for rights to enforce parking. PCM 86-107 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave and seconded by Vice -Chairman Hawkinson and passed by a 6-0 vote to recommend approval of the Tentative Tract Map 13364 and Specific Plan 86-4 and approve the Conditional Use Permit 86-7, subject to the conditions as recommended by Staff and the Planning Commission. Chairman Caouette called a recess at 8:05, meeting reconvened at 8:15 p.m. Chairman Caouette asked for any discussion on Site & Architectural Review 86-11. Commissioner Hargrave stated that his main concern was the roofing and the type of materials to be used. Stated that he was satisfied with the quality of the asphalt shingles. Stated that the Architect said that the asphalt shingles have a 30 year warranty; and that they are A -rated as far as fire retardant is concerned. PCM 86-108 Motion by Commissioner Cole and seconded by Chairman Caouette and passed by a 6-0 vote to approve the Site & Architectural Plan 86-11. B. Variance for Parcel No. 1 for Minimum Lot Width and Parcels 2 and 3 for Minimum Lot Depth within Parcel Map 10292. Chairman Caouette asked for Staff presentation. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that his office had received a letter, on this date, from Lucille Baugham, Attorney at Law, regarding this parcel. Stated that the applicant may want to address the Planning Commission and probably continue this item until the next meeting. Jim Dotson, Civil Engineer, representing the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Trawinski. Stated that the letter from Lucille Baugham states that apparently her mother has a covenant which prevents the particular property from being divided or built upon with more than 2 houses. Mr. Dotson requested a continuance be granted. P.C. Minutes 01 11-3-86 Page 9 PCM 86-109 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave and seconded by Vice -Chairman Hawkinson and passed by a 6-0 vote to continue this item to the next meeting or whenever the applicant gets the application in proper format for submission. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that this would include Agenda Item IC as well, because they are related. Chairman Caouette recognized a member of the audience, who wished to address the Planning Commission on this item. Asked them to state their name and address for the record. Bonnie Landa, Willet Court, asked for information regarding the project that was just continued. Mrs. Landa was interested in information regarding the type of homes and price range of the proposed project. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the only thing being proposed at this time was the subdividing of the parcel on the southwest corner of DeBerry and Willet Court into three (3) parcels. Stated that there is no specific area indicated as to what the square footage of the individual homes would be at this time. Chairman Caouette stated that the zoning and subdivision would eventually allow 3 single family homes. If the people in the audience plan on coming back, this item will be the first item on the agenda, when brought back. II. CONTINUED ITEMS. A. Mt. Vernon Villas, Phase I, Landscaping, Irrigation and Lighting Plans for approval. Chairman Caouette asked for Staff report. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the staff has reviewed the plan thoroughly and is recommending that the Planning Commission approve the proposed plan as submitted. Chairman Caouette asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Hargrave complemented the applicant and their landscaping firm on the plans. Stated that they were clear, concise and understandable. P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 10 Chairman Caouette concurred with Commissioner Hargrave's statement regarding the plans and also commended the applicant on the quality of the landscaping itself. PCM 86-110 Motion by Vice -Chairman Hawkinson and seconded by Commissioner Hargrave and passed by a 6-0 vote to approve the detailed Landscaping, Lighting and Irrigation Plan as submitted. B. Site & Architectural Review for Arco Mini -market Convenience Store located at 22087 Barton Road. Chairman Caouette asked for staff presentation. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, presented staff report. Chairman Caouette asked if there were any questions of staff and/or the applicant. Stated that the plan is the same as originally submitted, wtih a little more information with regard to actual color of the building itself. Commissioner Hargrave stated that he would assume that the color scheme shown would be what they are going to see on the property in question. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that that was his understanding of the situation. In response to Commissioner Van Gelder's question on what would happen if the City denied the project, based on colors, Mr. Nabih Akar stated that they would not do the project. PCM 86-111 Motion by Commissioner Van Gelder and seconded by Commissioner Hargrave and passed by a 5-1 vote to approve the Site & Architectural Review for the Arco Mini -Market convenience store. Commissioner Cole voted against the motion. III. NEW BUSINESS A. Site & Architectural Review 86-14, Single Family Residence located at 23204 Thompson Drive. Chairman Caouette asked for staff report. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, presented staff report. Stated P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 11 that the subject site is located on a private roadway. Townsend and Thompson Drives are both private roadways and all the properties that are developed right now are taking access from those roadways. Stated that they are developed, but not to the standards that the City would normally accept for a public roadway project. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Site & Architectural Review 86-14, subject to the Conditions of Approval. Stated that the memorandum, attached to the staff report regarding roadways, was for the Planning Commission's information, only. Chairman Caouette asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Hargrave asked staff for clarification regarding the memorandum. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the staff is recommending that not only the improvements, but, also the dedication in this particular case be left alone until such time as all the property in that area want to have improved streets. Stated that there is no reason, at this time, that there should be installation of curb and gutter along the frontage of that one parcel. Commissioner Hargrave confirmed, with Staff concurring, that in this case, it is left on for the City to have that easement if it is a 15' private street. And, that the City has no problem of getting an easement on that property to improve it. Chairman Caouette asked if there was any further discussion on the project. Commissioner Hargrave asked if there was any problem with the northside of the property, which has 30' embankment down to the bottom and the sewer piping down at the bottom behind the property. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that there was not really a problem. The sewer line is an easement and that this development would have no impact on it. PCM 86-112 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave and seconded by Commissioner Cole and passed by a 6-0 vote to approve Site & Architectural Review 86-14, subject to the conditions of approval. B. Set a Study Session Date to Establish Themes within Corridors. Chairman Caouette asked for staff report. P.G. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 12 Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that the Title 18 Committee suggested, and since then, the City Council has requested Staff to convey to the Planning Commission that the City Council would like them to consider the establishment of themes as provided for in Title 18. Stated that included in the Staff Report was Chapter 16, Sectin 16.030, Subsection C-9, of the Zoning Code. This section insures that the plans for the landscaping and open spaces conform with the requirements of the Chapter. Stated that the Planning Commission has the right of establish the themes which would include architectural themes and color themes. Vice -Chairman Hawkinson asked if there was any particular area in question. Joseph Kicak responded that specifically an area that has been zoned C-2 and A-P along the frontage of Barton Road, on both sides. Vice -Chairman Hawkinson asked if that would include Commerce Way. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, stated that that should be included. Stated that Commerce Way is going to remain C-2, CPD at least down to DeBerry Street. Discussion took place among the Commissioners regarding the time and date for the study session. The date, for the study session was set for November 24, 1986, at 6:30 p.m. Chairman Caouette asked if there was any other business to be brought before the Commission. Joseph Kicak, Planning Director, advised the Planning Commission that there was an appeal of the Planning Commission decision on Conditional Use Permit 86-8, Lawson Terrace Apartments, to the City Council. Stated that the Planning Commission should have a copy of the appeal with all the signatures of the property owners concerned and that this item will be heard by the City Council on Thursday, November 6, 1986. Chairman Caouette adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Approved by: CIOIPMM, Planning commission P.C. Minutes 11-3-86 Page 13