Loading...
03/25/1985 12-8.1032 Grand Terrace Planning Commission Minutes of Adjourned Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 The adjourned regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California 92324 on March 25, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Sanford L. Collins. PRESENT: Sanford L. Collins, Chairman Ray Munson, Vice-Chairman William DeBenedet, Commissioner Jerry Hawkinson, Commissioner Gerald Cole, Commissioner Norman Caouette, Commissioner Vern Andress, Commissioner Winifred Bartel, Commissioner John McDowell, Commissioner Tim D. Serlet, Planning Staff Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIENCE: Led by Commissioner McDowell I. MINUTES Minutes of March 4, 1985 PCM 85-20 Motion by Commissioner McDowell, seconded by Vice- Chairman Munson and passed by a 9-0 vote to approve the minutes of March 4, 1985, as submitted. Ia. Master Plan for the Mt. Vernon/Canal Street Area The above item was added to the Planning Commission Agenda at the request of Chairman Collins. Chairman Collins stated that he thought the Planning Commission was in agreement on the following items: 1.) There needs to be access across the Gage Canal. 2. ) The intersections of Newport, Carhart, and McClarren with Canal Street appear to be logical access points. . 3.) Canal Street should be widened to it's full width on the Canal side. 4.) A frontage road parallel to and east of Canal Street should be established. 5. ) The costs for these improvements shall be borne by the Developers. Mr. Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney, responded that he has no problems with the General concept of preparing a Master Plan. However, the Planning Commission is still obligated to give a fair and impartial hearing to the specific plan before them tonight. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 2 Ia. Master Plan (Cont. ) Mr. Hopkins also informed the Commission that he had been directed by the City Manager's office to prepare Eminent Domain proceedings for access across the Canal. Vice-Chairman Munson questioned the time frame. Attorney Hopkins explained the necessary procedures and estimated that the entire process would take approximately 5 months. II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Specific Plan/Conditional Use Permit 85-2, Chaparral Pines Apartments (157 Units) north of Barton Road and West of Mount Vernon Avenue. (Continued from March 4, 1985 Planning Commission Meeting) Mr. Serlet, Planning Staff, presented the Staff Report. The plot plan of March 4, 1985 had been revised to show additional parking spaces and a supplemental drawing had been attached showing an alternative access across the Canal. The Planning Commission did not have any questions of Staff. Chairman Collins requested the applicant to address the Commission. Mrs. Judy Jorgenson, representing Universal Contractors, briefly explained the revised plot plan and introduced Mr. Noel Christianson andMr. David Barakian of C.G. Engineering to address the traffic issues. Commissioner Caouette asked Mr. Christianson to comment on the proposed mix of residential and commercial traffic through the existing commercial complex. Mr. Christianson responded that the left turn movement-from the shopping center onto Barton Road could be restricted. Mr. Christianson also felt thatthe proposed development would not have'a significant impact on Barton Road traffic. Commissioner Caouette asked if residential traffic from the proposed development would createany significant traffic problems by traveling through the existing complex. Mr. Christianson responded that in his opinion there would be no significant traffic problems in the parking lot. Commissioner Caoueete asked if this design could be classified as a normal design. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 3 II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Cont.) A. Continued. Mr. Christianson responded that you would generally not have a design using a shopping center as a major point of ingress/egress. However, just because it is not the normal situation does not mean that it could not be done. Vice-Chairman Munson questioned the effect of the additional traffic on Canal Street. Mr. Christianson referred the question to his assistant, Mr. Barakian. Mr. Barakian responded that his study proposed a frontage road parallel to Canal Street with two access points across the Gage Canal. Commissioner Andress stated that he would like to see some type of barrier erected to restrict ingress/egress from the development to the commercial center. Commissioner Bartel asked Mr. Christianson if he had had any other experiences with residential development traveling through a commercial development to a public road. Mr. Christianson responded that he had no experience with residential development passing through a commercial development like this. The Planning Commission engaged in a discussion concerning the possible improvements along that portion of the existing parking lot providing access to the project. Mrs. Jorgenson stated additional parking has been provided along the north side of Britton Way. Commissioner Caouette stated that it appears some of the existing parking will be used for the residential development. Mrs. Jorgenson responded that that particular parking had been installed in anticipation of future development and was not a requirement of the previous project. Vice-Chairman Munson asked what benefit the citizens of Grand Terrace would receive from this project. Mrs. Jorgenson gave a brief explanation of the amenities that would be available within the complex along with the public improvements. Chairman Collins asked about the Conditional Use Permit. Mrs. Jorgenson responded the Conditional Use Permit and the Specific Plan were being considered concurrently. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 4 II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Cont. ) A. Continued. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing for those wishing to speak in favor of or opposition to the project. Gordon Curtis, Chairman of the Property Committee for the Southern California Conference for the United Church of Christ, spoke in favor of the project. Mr. Bob Keeney, 12139 Mt. Vernon, stated that the developers felt they were down zoning the property to benefit the community. Mr. Jim Rigley, 22605 De Soto Street, asked the City Attorney if this project were approved, would it set a precedent for approval of future projects in this area. Mr. Hopkins, City Attorney, responded that it would not set a precedent. Each individual project would be judged on it's own merits. Mr. Rigley then expressed concern about high density rental housing in the heart of Grand Terrace and the potential traffic problems that could occur. Mr. Jack Booker, 11785 Mount Vernon, expressed opposition to the proposed density of 17.5 units per acre, but stated that he would accept densities of 9-12 units per acre. Chairman Collins gave the applicant the opportunity for rebuttal. Mrs. Judy Jorgenson gave a brief dissertation on the benefits of the project. Mr. Jim Rigley requested an opportunity to rebut Mrs. Jorgenson. Chairman Collins allowed those in opposition to the project an opportunity to rebut. Mr. Jim Rigley expressed concern over the potential traffic problems. Mr. Gordon Curtis urged the Commissioner to consider this an ideal location to meet the requirements of the Housing Element of the General Plan. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing with no one else speaking in favor of or in opposition to the project. The Planning Commission discussed the entire project among themselves and considered the following motions: PCM 85-21 Motion by Commissioner Caouette, seconded by Commissioner McDowell and passed by a 9-0 vote to require access across the Gage Canal along with the improvements of Canal Street to City Standards along the entire Canal Street frontage of the property. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 5 II. . .UNEINISHED BUSINESS (Copt.) Motion by Commissioner Hawkinson, seconded by Commissioner DeBendet and defeated by a 2-7 vote to restrict left turns from the project onto Barton Road and Mt. Vernon. Chairman Collins, Vice-Chairman Munson, Commissioner Bartel, Commissioner Caouette, Commissioner McDowell, Commissioner Andress, and Commissioner Cole voted against the motion. The Planning Commission reviewed the conditions of approval as submitted at the March 4, 1985 Meeting. Motion by Vice-Chairman Munson, seconded by Commissioner Andress, failed by a 2-7 vote to add Canal Street to Condition 5 of the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Bartel, Caouette, -McDowell, Cole, Hawkinson, Andress and DeBenedet voted against the motion. Motion by-Commissioner Andress, seconded. by Commissioner Hawkinson,. failed-by a 4-5 vote to permit access to the development from Town & County Plaza only for emergency vehicles. Chairman Collins, Vice-Chairman Munson, Commissioner Bartel, DeBenedet, and McDowell voted against the motion. The Planning Commission discussed the parameters of the project along with potential problems amongst themselves. PCM 85-22 Motion by Commissioner- Caouette, seconded by Vice- Chairman Munson, and passed by a 5-4 vote to deny Specific Plan/Conditional Use Permit 85-2 based on the following: 1.) The inappropriateness of residential traffic taking access through a commercial center. 2.) Concern of the area residents over the proposed density. 3.) The possibility of all-the discussion items including parking, being used to set a precedent. Commissioner Bartel,_ Commissioner DeBenedet, Commission McDowell, and Commissioner Hawkinson voted against the motion. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 6 II. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Cont.) A. Continued. Chairman Collins stated that he believed the necessary zone changes and general plan amendments should be obtained before submittal of a development plan. Mrs. Jorgenson requested the Planning Commission to consider Phase I only. Commissioner Caouette responded that he would not make that a part of his motion. Mrs. Jorgenson asked if the applicant could waive the ten day appeal period and have a public hearing before the City Council on March 28, 1985. City Attorney Hopkins responded that although the proper mailers had been sent, the legal notice had not been posted in 3 public places as required. Commissioner Caouette reiterated the main points of his motion again. Chairman Collins called a 10 minute recess at 8:55 p.m. III. NEW BUSINESS A. Time Extension, Tentative Parcel Map No. 6868, Southeast corner of Pico Street and Blue Mountain Court. Mr. Serlet, Planning Staff, presented the Staff Report. The applicant is pursuing a waiver from the Regional Water Quality Board to install septic tanks on his proposed parcels. Commissioner DeBenedet asked what length of time the extension would be. Staff responded that the applicant had requested a two year extension. Staff also informed the Commission that since the applicant had already previously received a one year time extension the maximum allowable extension he could now receive would be two years. PCM 85-23 Motion by Commissioner Caouette seconded by Commissioner Bartel, and passed by a 8-1 vote to recommend to the City Council a two year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 6868. Chairman Collins voted against the motion. B. Site and Architectural Review SA 85-4, for Tentative Tract 11450, 12 unit condominium on ± 0.78 ac. ; west of Preston Avenue. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 7 III. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) B. Continued. Mr. Tim D. Serlet, Planning Staff, presented the Staff Report. The proposed project was approved in August of 1980 and had received one time extension. The project was now being brought before the Planning Commission in accordance with the original conditions of approval. Condition 5 of the Conditions of approval required the applicant to submit the project to an Architectural Review Committee, if one is established, to review the type of construction and the materials. The Planning Commission had no questions of Staff. Chairman Collins requested the applicant to address the Planning Commission. Mr. Roy Roberts, 5871 Argyle Way, Riverside; Owner and applicant, volunteered to answer any questions. Commissioner McDowell asked about the drainage situation. Mr. Roberts responded that the drainage had been conditioned and he had submitted plans to the City Engineer. Commissioner McDowell questioned the survey data. Mr. Roberts responded that a survey monument had been set erroneously, but it had been corrected. Commissioner DeBendet questioned the type of fence on the south and west side of the project. Mr. Roberts explained that the original condition called for a combination wood and block fence, to be approved by the City Engineer. Commissioner DeBenedet questioned the maintenance and type of wood that would be used in the fence. Mr. Roberts responded that the wood portion of the fence would consist of clear cedar that would be allowed to weather to a grey finish. Vice-Chairman Munson asked if the apartments to the north have adequate parking. Mr. Roberts responded that his project meets the City requirements for parking. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing for those wishing to speak in .favor of or in opposition to the project. Mr. John Lizzenby, Manager of the apartments at 12044 Preston, voiced concern over potential drainage problems involving his property. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 8 III. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) B. Continued. Mrs. Lula Armstrong, 12072 Preston Street, requested a block wall along the portion of her property bordered by the project. Mr. Herman Armstrong, 12072 Preston Street, explained that he would like the block wall for a sound barrier. Mr. Roberts stated that there would be a Homeowner's Association for maintenance. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing with no one else speaking in favor of or in opposition to the project. The Planning Commission discussed the project among themselves. Chairman Collins stated that the Commission could either approve the fencing plan or change the condition. City Attorney Hopkins stated that the Commission could not change the conditions of approval. However, since the condition in question was to be approved by the City Engineer's office, the Commission could certainly recommend to the Engineer's office. PCM 85-24 Motion by Commissioner Caouette, seconded by Commissioner Munson, and passed by a 9-0 vote to recommend to the City Engineer that a predominately block wall be installed along the south and west property line of Tract 11450. PCM 85-25 Motion by Commissioner Caouette, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and passed by a 9-0 vote to approve Site and Architectural Plan 85-4, including the findings as written in the Staff Report and the conditions recommended by Staff. C. Tentative Tract Map 12966, 20 single family lots on ± 4.63 net acres, north of Van Buren Street and East of Vivienda Avenue. Mr. Tim D. Serlet, Planning Staff, presented the Staff Report. Tentative Tract 12966 is proposing 20 single family lots on approximately 4.8 acres. Staff explained that due to the off-set cul-de-sac and the curve linear streets some of the lots had less than a 60' width at the building setback line. However, a portion of the City Code made allowance for curved streets and allowed the width of a lot at the building setback line along a curved street to be a minimum of 40' . The Planning Commission indicated that the 40' width was acceptable to them in this case. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1986 PAGE 9 III. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) C. Continued. Commissioner Caouette asked if the palm trees along Van Buren would be replaced with a similar size of a 5 gallon tree. Staff responded that the Commission could specify the size and type. Commissioner McDowell questioned which dwelling units would remain. Staff responded that the applicant wished to save the existing structures north of the intersection of Pascal Avenue and Van Buren Street. Commissioner McDowell asked if a time limit could be placed on the remodeling. Staff responded that the tentative map can be approved for two years. Chairman Collins requested the applicant address the Planning Commission. Grant Becklund, 647 North Main Street, Riverside; representing the owner, asked if the palm trees could be replaced instead of relocated. Staff responded that the City has a list of street trees. Commissioner Hawkinson asked what was presently existing on the parcel to the east. Mr. Becklund responded that it was occupied by a single family dwelling. Chairman Collins opened the public hearing for those in favor of or opposed to the project to speak. Barbara Pfennighausen, 12364 Pascal Avenue, requested clarification of the proposed street system. Staff responded that Pascal Avenue would end in a cul-de-sac with the east/west street becoming a portion of Cardinal Street. Ilene Hatta, 22362 Van Buren, asked if Van Buren would be widened on her side of the street. Chairman Collins responded that the widening would occur only in front of the development. Chairman Collins closed the public hearing with no one else speaking in favor of or in opposition to the project. The Planning Commission discussed the project among themselves. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 10 III. NEW BUSINESS (Cont.) C. Continued. Commissioner DeBenedet stated that he would like to see the utility building located on Lot 2 moved and an additional lot created. Staff pointed out that an additional lot would create a problem with the density requirements of the General Plan. Commissioner Caouette felt that by keeping the minimum lot size to 7200 square feet the General Plan would be satisfied. Commissioner Andress excused himself from the Meeting at approximately 10:10 p.m. Commissioner McDowell expressed concern that the existing buildings are an eyesore. Motion by Commissioner DeBendet, seconded by Commission McDowell, and defeated by a 4-4 vote to eliminate the existing workshop/garage and create an additional lot. Chairman Collins, Commissioner Cole, Commissioner Hawkinson, and Commissioner Caouette voted against the motion. Commissioner McDowell felt a time limit should be placed on the renovation of the existing units. City Attorney Hopkins informed the Commission that they could add a condition if they wished. Motion by Commissioner McDowell, seconded by Commissioner Cole, and defeated by a 3-5 vote to require renovation of the existing structure to begin 6 months after the approval of the Tentative Tract by the City Council. Chairman Collins, Vice-Chairman Munson, Commissioner Cole, Commissioner Hawkinson, and Commissioner Caouette voted against the motion. Commissioner Caouette motioned that Lot 2 be divided into two lots and the existing utility building being removed. Motion died for lack of a second. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Regular Meeting March 25, 1985 PAGE 11 III. NEW BUSINESS (Cont. ) C. Continued. PCM 85-25 Motion by Commissioner Caouette, seconded by Commissioner DeBenedet, and passed by a 7-0 vote to require Site and Architectural approval for the existing workshop prior to the issuance of Building Permits for Tract No. 12966. PCM 85-26 Motion by Commissioner Hawkinson, seconded by Commissioner Bartel, and passed by a 7-0 vote to recommend adoption of the Negative Environmental Declaration and approval of the Tentative Tract 12966 to the City Council including the findings as written and subject to the conditions recommended by Staff as amended tonight and also giving the applicant the option to remove or relocate the palm trees along Van Buren Street. D. Resource Recovery Facility, presentation by IWA Engineering. Chairman Collins asked if the applicant would like to continue this item. Mr. Brian Esgate, representing the applicant responded that they would like to present the item tonight. Chairman Collins invited the applicant to present his item. Jerry Wood of IWA Engineering showed a film and gave a brief dissertation on Resource Recovery Facilities. Commissioner McDowell excused himself from the meeting at approximately 10:25 p.m. The Commission expressed an interest in the applicant to pursue the item further. E. April 1, 1985, Planning Commission Meeting. PCM 85-27 Motion by Commissioner DeBenedet, seconded by Chairman Collins, and passed by a 7-0 vote to establish the firt and third Mondays of each month as regular meeting dates. Chairman Collins adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 11:07 p.m. to a regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. on April 1, 1985. Respectfully submitted O EPH KICAK, Planning Director 7 Ch-ziirmanh Planning Commission