Loading...
06/01/1987GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JUNE 1, 1987 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 June 1, 1987, at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman, Norman Caouette. PRESENT: Norman Caouette, Chairman Jerry Hawkinson, Vice Chairman Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner David Sawyer, Planning Director Loretta Thompson, City Clerk ABSENT: Gerald Cole, Commissioner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: led by Vice Chairman Hawkinson. I. MINUTES The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held May 4, 1987 were presented for review. PCM-87-12 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave, second by Commissioner Hawkinson, ALL AYES, to approve the minutes of the May 4, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Robert E. Keeney The Chairman, Mr. Norman Caouette, invited Mr. Sawyer to review NE Corner of the proposal from Mr. Keeney. Barton Rd. and LaCross Mr. Sawyer advised there is a request before the Planning Commission for a determination as to whether or not a recreational vehicle park is a permitted use within the C-2 Zone (G.T.M.P. Section 18.33.030.,I). Mr. Sawyer further advised the subject property is currently split zoned. The southerly portion of the lot, which extends northerly from Barton Road approximately 300 feet, is zoned M-2 while the remainder of the property is zoned C-2. The applicant is proposing to develop the property with a combined recreational vehicle park and retail commercial facility. The proposal, as presented, cannot be approved because of the proposed commercial use that is located in the M-2 zoned portion of the lot. In addition, the recreation vehicle park concept is not a permitted use in any of the Citys' current zones. Therefore, in order for the applicant to proceed, he must receive a determination of use regarding the RV Park, a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Ordinance Amendment, a possible C.U.P., and site and architectural review. Before the Commission, at this time, is the applicants' request for a determination of use regarding the location of a RV Park within the Citys' C-2 zone. The Commissions discussion and decision should be focused on this issue. Mr. Sawyer proceeded with a presentation of the Staff Report and the recommendation that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution making a determination that a recreational vehicle park is a use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit as provided in Section 18.33.030 (I) of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. Commissioner Caouette stated that, in Mr. Sawyer's report, he seems to liken the proposed RV Park to a motel use. Therefore, it follows that an RV Park should be a permitted use with a Conditional Use Permit within the C-2 zone. Commissioner Caouette asked in what way Mr. Sawyer found the two similar. Mr. Sawyer indicated he feels the issue to be looked at is whether or not the RV Park will become a permanent residential use or a transit overnight type use. One of the reasons for the Conditional Use Permit is to allow the Commission to put conditions on the project such as the length of stay. If the stay was restricted to no less than two weeks, the recreational vehicle park could be considered similar to a motel. The differences being that the parking would be an issue and that the motel would be in an enclosed unit and the RV Park would be more open and more of a possible nuisance as far as noise is concerned. Commissioner Hargrave asked if Mr. Sawyer had any idea how we could condition a Conditional Use Permit to ensure short term stay. Mr. Sawyer advised the conditions could be to limit the stay to two weeks. It would be like any other Conditional Use Permit that would require or regulate hours of work. It is a matter of enforcing the conditions. As wel 1 , the business license would have to be renewed so that the Planning Department could review the area on a yearly basis and make sure that the RV Park does meet the conditions. Tabs would also be kept on the complaints received. Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether Mr. Sawyer had any idea if the developer would find the condition of a short term stay detrimental to the operation of the park. Mr. Sawyer advised -the developer has indicated, in discussion, he would be ame-nab4e to the -idea. However, he did suggest two weeks may be too shoa-rt and indicated he would prefer a month type of situation. That will be a detail of the project that the Commission will have to be looking at at a later date. From a general point of view, apartments are on a month to month basis. If the RV Park is allowed to have stays in excess of two weeks, it gets very close to a residential use rather than a short term use. That may be an issue that could be in disagreement. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 2 Commissioner Van Gelder questioned whether Mr. Sawyer felt the activities going on in the recreational vehicle park would be all that similar to the activities going on in a hotel or a motel. Mr. Sawyer advised that, in a motel, the activities could be fairly similar. However, a hotel has the connotation of having other facilities such as a restaurant. This particular project will have commerical facilities in the front. However, he is not aware of any plans for a restaurant type use. There is a problem he could see with the recreational vehicle park having a more open atmosphere. This could create a noise level that could cause a problem for surrounding residents. In a motel situation, you have cars coming in but the use of steroes and that type of equipment will not be a problem for surrounding property owners. The RV Park could became a noise nuisance. Mr. Sawyer advised that traffic will be very similar as far as the intensity of the traffic was concerned. Commissioner Van Gelder questioned whether the developer had given any reason why he proposed to have a recreational vehicle park in Grand Terrace as opposed to near a recreational area. Mr. Sawyer indicated the applicant had provided general comments as to how he felt such a park would be successful. Mr. Sawyer advised the developer is in the audience and can address certain questions. Chairman Caouette opened the public hearing. Bob Keeney In response to Commissioner Van Gelders' question, Mr. Keeney 12139 Mt. Vernon, indicated they do not own any other property in the cities Grand Terrace around here that would be suitable for an RV Park. He feels an RV Park is a good business opportunity because there are not many of them in the area. In addition, the site has a very easy on and off ramp. They have looked at other RV Parks in the area and think this location is far superior to any of the others that exist. Those are the reasons we have selected this site. Commissioner Van Gelder asked what the developer proposes the people ,will do in the recreational park for activities while they are there. Mr. Keeney advised it is called a recreational vehicle park and it's just that. A place for people to come in overnight, park their vehicles and go to the various places in the area they may wish to see. Commissioner Van Gelder indicated she noted, on the map, that Mr. Keeney had indicated a circular road or walkway or runway or whatever in the site. She asked that Mr. Keeney explain the reason for this roadway. Mr. Keeney indicated the campers would come in through a check point at a certain point and would travel on a circular road to their campsite. He also noted there is a drive through in the middle of the park so Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 3 that people won't get trapped. They al so own a piece of property thirty feet wide to the east of the property that would be used for emergency vehicles only. The traffic will be funnelled out at the entrance gate. As to the runway, we do have a little park and a little internal trail. There is a little tot lot planned in the runway area. There is a spot available for a pool, but they are not, at this time, planning to install one. Commissioner Munson asked Mr. Keeney if he plans to have the price for the stay at his recreational vehicle park the same year round. .Mr. Munson indicated he was asking this question because, at this time, he cannot grasp a months stay although he can see a two week stay. He can see, however, if the developer does have a reduced rate, that people would come in during the off season and just hang around. Mr. Keeney advised that, at this time, they do not intend to offer reduced rates. Mr. Keeney indicated he feels the fall and spring would be the slack time. Commissioner Munson asked if Mr. Keeney could live with two weeks. Mr. Keeney indicated he would lake to see it at one month, but if his schedule is restricted to two weeks he doesn't see that as a major hurdle. Commissioner Hargrave suggested that, before making a determination on that issue, we could check with other parks in the area to find out what the normal stay is. Commissioner Hargrave asked the developer if it would hamper him, in any way, if the Conditional Use Permit was not issued this evening. Mr. Keeney indicated the Commission is not being asked for a Conditional Use Permit this evening but fo-r a determination of use and yes, this determination is very important to him. If it is determined that it is a proper use, they can proceed with plans and keep on their time frame. Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether he was concerned about a possible zoning change in that area that would make his proposed development non -conforming. Mr. Keeney indicated he did not think there were any plans to change any zoning on the back part of their property. Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether he would be willing to take his chances if the determination of use was given tonight. Mr. Keeney indicated that, if the Commission gives the determination of use, it's up to him how much money he spends before he gets his Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Caouette questioned if anybody in the audience would like to speak in favor of this proposal. As there was no one, he asked if there was anyone who would like to speak against the proposal. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 4 Ann M. Stauble Ms. Stauble indicated she had a couple of questions. She asked 21945 Grand how the potential noise factor will be mitigated. Ms. Stauble Terrace Road also asked how the developer plans to control the emergency road and ensure it does not become the exit for the recreational vehicle park. She can see that the campers will be using this road as an exit onto Grand Terrace Road, which would not be able to handle the increase in traffic. Mr. Sawyer advised those were questions that would be determined on a site specific basis. Mr. Sawyer advised the noise and traffic are the two major concerns he has with regards to that site. We could require things such as masonary walls around the outside of the park to help with the noise impact, somewhat, and restriction on the level of the noise, in accordance with the Municipal Code. Traffic will have to be looked at to ensure that it is not overbearing at the time. Mr. Keeney indicated they will not let campers go out that road as an exit as they may not have paid for the use of the site. The only reason they are providing this access is to provide for emergency vehicles such as fire trucks. It wil l have a gate. They do plan to put a six foot high masonary wall around the site. Ms. Stauble questioned if there will�be a time constraint after which the noise level in the park will have to be reduced. The number of parking spaces within the recreational vehicle park is also a big concern for her. She questioned whether it was within code. Mr. Sawyer indicated the number of spaces is something that will have to be looked into. It will take a great deal of staff review and we will have to contact other recreational vehicle parks to see what the norm is. With regards to the parking, the parking proposed on the plan is in conformance with the code. We will be looking at parking in the future for the C-2 area. The parking for the C-2 zone does appear to be rather restricted. The applicant may have to revise his plans to meet the parking requirements as a result of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance Amendment. The noise issue is one of the key issues. There is already a City Ordinance that restricts or puts limits on the amount of noise created at different times, this could be placed as a condition on a C.U.P. The public hearing was closed and referred back to the Commission for discussion. Chairman Caouette indicated this is a determination of the use in this zone. This does not apply only to this site, but any C-2 zone in the City. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 5 Commissioner Hargrave asked if the Commission gives the determination of use as requested, could a similar development be proposed in any C-2 zone and the developer expect to receive permission to proceed. Chairman Caouette indicated that is correct. At the request of Commissioner Hargrave, Mr. Sawyer pointed out the current C-2 zone. Mr. Hawkinson indicated the noise factor, because of the nature of the clientele, is something that would cause a serious problem and could not be mitigated in any satisfactory way. He further suggested he could not see how a recreational vehicle park in this area could even be considered viable and he was surprised it got this far. Commissioner Hawkinson indicated this particular project is not the type of project he would like to see in any C-2 zone within the City. Commissioner Van Gelder agreed with Vice Chairman Hawkinson and, in addition, she had difficulties with considering hotels/motels in a similar class as recreational vehicle parks. Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether a project could be denied because of the noise factor. Commissioner Hargrave indicated that a concern to him was the fact that, if we determine the use allowing RV Parks in the C-2 zone, we are doing this for the entire City and not for this particular site. This is a more wide reaching policy than simpiy one devel opment. He feels he does not have enough information to base a decision on this matter. Commissioner Munson suggested he did not feel the Commission should take any action that would close the door to RV Parks in the City of Grand Terrace. PCM-87-13 Motion by Vice Chairman Hawkinson, second by Commissioner Van Gelder, carried with Commissioner Munson voting NOE, that a recreational vehicle park is not a use permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Section 18.33.030 (I) of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. Jesse Camacho/ Mr. Sawyer advised this application is for a Conditional Use Jim Goode Permit to allow the operation of a Cabinet Shop in the M-R zone 21800 Barton (G.-T.M.C. Section 18.66) and proceeded to present the Staff Road, Ste. 110 Report. Chairman Caouette asked if the Commissioners had any questions of staff with regards to this proposal. As there were no questions, the Chairman opened the public hearing inviting anyone who wish to speak in favor or against the project to do SO. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 6 William Miles Mr. Miles indicated his property abutts 21800 Barton Road. His 21840 Grand main concern, with regards to this proposal, is noise control Terrace Road and the working hours for the Cabinet Shop. Mr. Miles indicated he feels there will be a noise problem because of the nature of the business. Mr. Sawyer advised noise was considered and it was felt the construction of the building would be sufficient to reduce the impact of the noise. The interior orientation and direction of construction will help control the noise. The noise issue is also one of the reasons for the recommendation that a condition be appli-ed that all work be done within the building itself. It was indicated that all work will be in accordance with Grand Terrace City Code Ordinance No. 99 which restricts the use of a saw -from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Mr. Mid es indicated this would address his concerns. Jim Goode Mr. Goode, owner of the Barton Business Park, advised that Mr. 5970 Marshall Camacho presently has a business in Grand Terrace. His Circle, Anaheim business hours are approximately 7:00 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. At this time, he does not work Saturdays or Sundays. To his knowledge, there has been no complaints about noise regarding his business. The public hearing was closed and returned to Commission for further discussion. Commissioner Ilan Gelder questioned whether the building was constructed in such a way to reduce the noise level with the ..- idea that the businesses to be located in the park would generate a higher noise level. Mr. Sawyer advised he did not have the answer to this question and suggested Mr. Goode be asked to respond. Mr. Goode advised the building was constructed with the idea of accommodating businesses allowed in M-R Zones. The building is constructed with six inch steel reinforced walls and the ceiling insulated to keep any noise from going out that way. There are no back doors so the business cannot open their backdoors allowing noise to escape in this way and irritate the neighbors. It is an enclosed park. The only noise will come out through the garage doors when they are opened. He feels it is quite well contained. PCM-87-14 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave, second by Vice Chairman Hawkinson, ALL AYES, that A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING CUP-87-2 ALLOWING A CABINET SHOP TO BE LOCATED AT 21800 BARTON ROAD, SUITE 110 PER SECTION 18.36.040,E OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, be approved. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 7 Carpet Pad Whse Commissioner Munson advised he would be abstaining from the and Sales discussion and voting on this matter as he is in the same business. Mr. Sawyer advised the application is for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of the Carpet Pad Warehouse and Sales Facility in the M-R zone (G.T.M.C. Section 18.66). The Staff comments are identical to the previous proposal with exception that the Carpet Pad Warehouse and Sales Facility falls under the Use Permitted for building materials and storage and sales in the M-R zone. Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether this would be for storage of carpet pads only or would there be some manufacturing done there. Mr. Goode advised it is, basically for the storage of carpet pads and a sales facility. Chairman Caouette opened the public hearing inviting those wishing to speak in favor of or against the proposal to do so. As there did not appear to be anybody who wished to speak to this proposal, the public hearing was closed and returned to Commission for discussion. PCM-87-15 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave, second by Vice Chairman Hawki-nson, carried with Commissioner Munson abstaining, that A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF 'GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING CUP-87-3 ALLOWING THE CARPET PAD WAREHOUSE AND SALES FACILITY TO BE LOCATED AT 21800 BARTON ROAD, SUITE 109 PER SECTION 18.36.040,5 OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, be approved. Tom Owens/ Chairman Caouette advised the next item was an application for Jim Goode a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of the Office 21800 Barton Rd. Furniture Facility within the M-R Zone. He asked Mr. Sawyer to comment. Mr. Sawyer advised staff comments are identical to the previous two items except that the application is for an Office Furniture Facility which is identified as a permited use in the zoning. Commissioner Hargrave questioned what the phrase "the operation of a Office Furniture Facility" means. Mr. Sawyer advised he understands it is a warehouse with some sales. Th-ere wfill be no manufacturing involved. Mr. Goode advised it is, basically, a warehousing of office furniture. Chairman Caouette opened the meeting public hearing inviting anyone who wished to speak for or against the proposal to do so. As there did not appear to be anybody to speak to the proposal, the public hearing was closed and returned to the Commission for discussion. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 8 PCM-87-16 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave, second by Commissioner Munson, ALL AYES, that A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING CUP-87-4 ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF AN OFFICE FURNITURE FACILITY TO BE LOCATED AT 21800 BARTON ROAD, SUIT€ 105, PER SECTION 18.36.040,6 OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, be approved. Patrick Chairman Caouette advised the application is for a Conditional Stramberskyf Use Permit to allow the operation of a Cabinet Shop within the Jim Goode M-R Zone. 21800 Barton Rd. Suite #106 Mr. Sawyer advised staff comments are similar to the ones previously submitted. When asked if there were doors on the back of this unit which would allow the noise to escape to the adjoining residences, Mr. Goode advised there were not. Chairman Caouette opened the meeting to a public hearing inviting those who wished to speak for or against the proposal to do so. As there did not appear to be anybody who wished to speak to this proposal, the public hearing was closed and returned to Commission for discussion. PCM-87-17 Motion by Commissioner Hargrave, second by Vice Chairman Hawkinson, ALL AYES, that A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING THE CUP-87-5 ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF A CABINET SHOP TO BE LOCATED AT 21800 BARTON ROAD, SUITE 106, PER SECTION 18.36.040,14 OF 0 THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, be approved. Glen Sharman Mr. Sawyer advised that Mr. Sharman had requested his 23175 Glendora application to subdivide a single 1.35 acre R-1 parcel into two Drive R-1 parcels be continued until the June 15, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Title 18 _ Chairman Caouette advised the next item was for the Planning Commission to consider the Title 18 Committee recommended revision of Title 18 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) (G.T.M.C. Title 18). Mr. Sawyer advised that, over the past several months, the Title 18 Committee has reviewed the current Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) for possible revi-s_ion. The Committee has now completed its review and it's recommendation is presented to the Commission, at this time. The Grand Terrace Planning Department recommends to the Planning Commission that they conduct the public hearing and take no action except to direct staff to review Title 18 and return to the Commission, as soon as practical, with recommendations regarding the revisions of Title 18 on a chapter by chapter basis. He further advised Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 9 Council has requested that the Commission consider chapters dealing with R-1, R-2, R-3 residential zones first, in relation to the General Plan Amendment that is going forward at this time. Chairman Caouette opened the public hearing for comments on the proposed revision for Title 18. Ken McClellan Mr. McClellan advised they have advised the Planning Consultant 21882 Grand of the position of the majority of the people residing west of Terrace Road the freeway. The position was that the property on both sides of Grand Terrace Road be rezoned to R-2 and eliminate the R-1 and the R-3 Zone. Their contention is there are large lots on the west side of the road and some people in that area felt they would like to have the right to build duplexes or triplexes on their property or to continue with agriculture uses. They are suggesting that this area be rezoned R-2 so they would have both the option to build duplexes or triplexes and the option of an agriculture variance for those people who want to continue with agricultural uses. They are basically concerned with the development of high rise multi -unit residential complexes. This would change the whole characteristic of the area. The residents in this area like their life style and would like to see it continue. Mr. McClellan indicated there was one question about zoning he did not understand. He questioned why zones were created and then conditional uses allowed. Chairman Caouette questioned whether or not there will be any conflicts with changing this to an R-2 Zone and allowing agricultural use. Mr. McClellan indicated he did not see where there would be any conflict in this area. Mr. McClellan indicated he felt this entire area should be zoned the same whatever zoning is decided on. The public hearing was closed and returned to Commission for discussion. Vice Chairman Hawkinson asked that this review be done as soon as possible as he will be gone from July 13, 1987 for four weeks. Commissioner Van Gelder indicated she was pleased Council had selected the three chapters to review as, had she been given the choice, those would be the three chapters she would review first. Commissioner Munson asked if they would have anything from the consultants with regards to their findings for the R-1, R-2 and R-3 zones. Mr. Sawye-r advised he will be working with the Conultants and will be bringing a consolidated recommendation to the ,Planning Commission for review. Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 10 Commissioner Hargrave questioned whether or not the City Planner will be adding any further comments to the proposed revision to Title 18 that was circulated. Mr. Sawyer advised he will be doing a review of Title 18 and -will be submitting his recommendations for Commission review. Commissioner Munson questioned whether page 50 of the proposed changes to Title 18, as recommended by the Title 18 Review Committee, was out of order. Before answering that inquiry, the Mr. Sawyer noted that all credit for preparing this package should be given to the City Clerk's Department as there were two sta-ff members operating the word processing machines from 10:00 a.m. til 12:00 midnight Saturday to complete the package for the Commission's review. Mr. Sawyer indicated page 50 does appear to be out of order. He advised he will get a copy of the correct page for insertion in their package. Commission Munson agreed that the staff did a great job in preparing the package The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted: D VID R. SAWYER, PL NING DIRECTOR Approved by: CHAIRMAN, Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes - 6/01/87 Page 11