Loading...
1989-12 RESOLUTION NO. 89-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING V-89-02 WHEREAS, the Applicant, Donald and Janet Lenaker, have applied for approval of V-89-02, which is a proposed variance from Section 18.12.040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code in relation to the sideyard setback requirement of 15 feet in an R1-20 zone; (see Exhibit A) and, WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November 6, 1989, regarding this application; and, WHEREAS, This project is a Class 3 Categorically Exemption per the California Environmental Quality Act. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, that the following findings are hereby made. 1. The general topography of the subject property is similar in nature to the surrounding properties. Various sizes of slopes are common throughout the Honey Hills area. However, the subject property is a corner lot and is burdened by an extremely large slope, both in height and in width which is located in the property's streetside sideyard area. This slope is a natural topographic feature and because of .its unique size severely restricts the property's buildable area in a mariner unlike other properties in the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The property has a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential. The proposed project is for a two story addition to a single family residence. The variance requested is for a zoning code regulation regarding setbacks and is therefore consistent with the existing General Plan landuse designation. 3. The property is zoned R1-20 which permits single family residential activity. The proposed variance is for a reduction in the required sideyard setback and not for a change in landuse and is therefore consistent with the existing zoning landuse designation. 4. The granting of this variance does not result in a special privilege due to the unique physical conditions of the property explained in finding #1. 5. Even though the proposed addition will be visible by adjacent properties as well as the general public, its location will be physically separated from the adjacent street by over 40 feet and will be at a considerably higher elevation. Its location and the various conditions of approval listed below will assure that the granting of this variance will not have a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood and/or the general public. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace that V-89-02 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: 1. All conditions as recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated October 19, 1989, attached as Attachment Xs Exhibit B. 2. All conditions as recommended by the Fire Warden's Office in their memorandum dated October 18, 1989, attached as Attachment As Exhibit C. 3. The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the design as approved by the Planning Commission on November 6, 1989, attached as Exhibit A to Attachment A. Minor changes and/or clarifications may be made by the Planning Department. 4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate school impaction fee to the Colton Unified School District. i PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a regular meeting held the 6th day of November, 1989 by the following vote: AYES: 7 NOES: 0 ABSENT: o ABSTAIN: o /Hawkinson, Chairman AaAning Commission ATTEST Wanlita Brown, i Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM &A John Harper, City Attorney "r �lN- , W.O. 12-8.5125 01 M E M O R A N D U M TRRHD TER C 22795 Barton Road TO: David Sawyer, Community Development Director Grand Terrace California 92324-5295 FROM: Joseph Ki cak, City Engineer Civic Center DATE: October 19, 1989 (714) 824-6621 SUBJECT: 23125 Westwood Street Following recommendations should be considered as conditions of approval for the proposed project: Byron R. Matteson 1 . Submit a complete plot plan showing the existing residence and Mayor the proposed addition, indicating all lot lines and the existing facilities. Hugh J. Grant Mayor Pro Tempore 2. Prepare a grading plan indicating the existing structure and other facilities on subject parcel . Show the existing Barbara Pfennighausen contours and/or elevations, as well as proposed. Jim Singley Gene Carlstrom 3. Pay all the capital improvement fund fees for park, streets, Council Members storm drain, sewer and school fees. ThomasJ. Schwab 4. Comply with all of the requirements of the pertinent codes . City Manager 5. Show all of the existing property corners. If these have not been set, provide property survey for subject property. 6. All of the above is to be completed by a person registered and authorized by law to perform the work. EXHIBIT B . .FOhESTRY AND FIRE WARDEN DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fire Protection Planning Services • County Government Center OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY 385 No. Arrowhead Avenue, First Floor San Bernardino, CA 9M5-0186 (714) 387-421.2, 387.4213 I FLOYU TID\YELL, Director , .., ..._ EMERGENCY SERVICES DATE: Savi+:a 1!w cornrr�utrt!cs of. Ar:4C1rb Oaks FROM. David J. Driscoll, Chief County Fire Warden CCIF) Chir:o Hills i,:y of Grand Terrace City of Needles Cr Gf7,^n Hills The following circled conditions apply to your project. c•.:i;; rl,; ni;,'n !�fesa D.,Qnctl Airport V �G a Devore Fire Department Reference Number: v "l( [/� [I a,iraye Fawnskin The above referenced project is protected by the San Harvard Havasu take Bernardino County Forestry & Fire Warden Department. Prior to any- construction occurring _ on any parcel, the f Hc,_T ale applicant shall contact the Fire Department for tcDF) Ncsperia verification of current Fire Protection requirements. Highland liomestead Valley All new construction shall comply with the existing Johnson Valley Uniform Fire Code Requirements and all applicable joshuaTree statues., codes, ordinances, or standards of the Fire CDF) Lc•n:a LirWa Department. ;CDF) Lucerrie Val;ey ' Lytle Creek -3 The street address shall be posted with a minimum of Mcrae t,:ne three ( 3 ) inch numbers, visible from .the street in !,ouwairtVie:,,Acres accordance with San Bernardino County Ordinance No. Valley 2108, prior to occupancy. Posted numbers shall contrast Oak Glen with their background and be visible and legible from Oa'c Hills the street. Parr. .Mcabi • f��: -4 Prior to final inspection or occupancy each chimney ..ier Dam I,b`,an used u ed in conjunction with any fireplace or any heating appliance in which solid or liquid fuel is Runpenuwij used shall be maintained with an approved spark arrestor Red bicuwa-in as identified in the Uniform Fire Code. Sar rrttcnio 1 5,ring V?.uey Leke -5 Prior to any construction occuring, all flammable vegetation shall be removed from each Wr,:,derVaI:V building site a minimum distance of thirty (3O) feet Yutt,ipa from any flammable building material, including a Wff) YL;cca Valley finished structure. EXHIBIT C ' Goard cf Supr,rvisas HARRY PA. MAYS ►JiARSHA I URO i. . . . . . . . . . . .First District BARBARA CRAM Rlr)RDAN . . . .Third District County Adminisirative Cjlfici.r ford D. 1'0IKELS . . . . . . . . . . ..Second'District LARRY WALKER . . . . . . . . . . .Foorth District ROBERT L. HAMMOCK _'. .-. ,Fifth D;srrict F-6 Prior to filial inspection or occupancy the development and each phase thereof shall have two ( 2) points of vehicular access for fire and other emergency equipment, and . for routes of escape which will safely handle evacuations as required in the development code. F-7 Prior to final inspection or occupancy private roadways which exceed one - hundred and fifty (150) feet in length shall be approved by the Fire Department having jurisdiction, and shall be extended to within one hundred and fifty ( 150) feet of, and shall give reasonable access to all portion of the .exterior walls of the first story of any .building. An access road shall be provided within fifty (50) feet of all buildings if the natural grade between the access road and the building is in excess of thirty percent (30) . Where the access roadway cannot be provided, an approved fire protection system or systems shall be provided, as required and approved by the Fire Department. F-8 Prior to final inspection or occupancy a turn-around shall be provided at the end of each roadway, one-hundred and fifty (150) feet or more in length and shall be approved by the Fire Department. Cul-de-sac length shall not exceed six-hundred (600) feet except as identified in the development code and approved by the chief. F-9 Private road maintenance , including but not limited to grading and snow removal, shall be provided for prior to recordation or approval . Written documentation shall be submitted to the Fire Department having jurisdiction: Private fire access roads shall provide an all weather surface with minimum paving width of 20 feet. F-10 Water systems designed to meet the required fire flow of this development shall be approved by the Fire Department having jurisdiction. The developer shall furnish the Fire Department with two copies of the water system improvement plan for approval and a letter from the Water Purveyor stating the availability of the required fire flow prior to recordation. Water systems shall be operational and approved by the Fire Department prior to any construction occurring. The required fire flow shall be determined by - appropriate calculations, using the San Bernardino County 'Guide for the Determination of Required Fire Flow. " . f r�4' In areas without water-serving utilities, the fire protection water system shall be based on NFPA pamphlet number 1231 and Uniform .Fire Code requirements. F-11 Prior to Building permits being issued approval fire hydrants shall be installed. Fire hydrants shall be 6" d i a m e t e r w i t h a m i n i m u m o n e 4" and one 2 1/2" connection. The hydrant type shall be approved by the Fire Department. All fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet with the exception of single family residential which may be increased to 600 feet maximum. F-12 Prior. to final inspection- or occupancy this development . shall comply with Fire Safety overlay conditions as adopted in County Ordinance Number 3341. The development is located in Fire Review Area F-13 Prior to issuance of a building permit a fuel modification zone in compliance with county standards is required. F-14 Prior to final inspection or occupancy, an approved Fire Department key box is required. If automatic electric security gates are used an approved lock switch is required on each gate in lieu of the box. Questions and/or comments may be directed to the Fire Protection Planning Section; County Government Center, 385 North Arrowhead, lst Floor, San Bernardino, California, 92415-0186; or call (714) 387-4225. Thank you for your co-operation. Sincerely, By F' Protection�Plan�ning�o­f' ficer CC: aW T y BYRON R. MATTESON t Mayor d BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN Mayor Pro Tern b Council Members HUGH J.GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD THOMAS J. SCHWAB VARIANCE APPLICATION ,1City Manager File no .``_y-- I - Z INSTRUCTIONS : PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT IN INK YOUR RESPONSES . PLEASE ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS COMPLETELY, ATTACH A SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY. PLEASE USE EXAMPLES , WHEN APPLICABLE, FOR CLARITY . 1 ) s name :Applicant ' 11C�t �-- . •� C.� ne� - - =.+'1C;� `C� 2 ) Project address 3) Applicant ' s address ( if different) : ____-_N .._ _ 4) Applicant ' s telephone no . (work.)__S�QS_`11��(lzome) 5 ) Owner' s Name ( if different) : G) Owner ' s address ( if different) : 7) Owner' s telephone number ( if different) :_—_—_ ___-- — 8) General Plan designation : L--Ic> 12 9) Zone : _-_.�1 Zo -- -- Overlay Zone____._._ 10) Lot size : 1, Ro-f`,:,4 , , 11 ) Building area : Existing = _>Cj S . F . _ � of Lot Area New -- -5_ F '- -- - -----� of Lot Area Total sJ S . F . _ _� of Lot Area 12) Living area total : 13) Parking required : Garage._..__— Open______ _ _ Spaces provided : Garage Open _ 14) Setbacks : Required: Front Rearj�;_ Side 457- , Side S^ Proposed: Front mac ._=, Rear/&)'-r-, Side 7 Side d` r �f'•> mho; /1r`-/'ira 22795 BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324-5295 • CI A I A-CH I V I�G- 1 V T B k .s 1 ) Describe your proposed project : ? ,a'Lct GC 2) Wh� Eh e sec�ions o.f th Zonin Code do you wish to vary from? 3) What is there about the size , shape , topography, location or surroundings of your property that makes it physically unique or special in contrast with other lots in the same zoning di�strict� 4) Does this Variance authorize an activity or use that is not authorized by the Zoning Ordinance? G If yes , please explain. C/'- 5) Does the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance deprive your property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in -the - same vicinity and zoning district? _ �_--.-- If. yes , please give examples , i �C,-1744L/� ..-----' � ...__. . .... _L-[.fi:M.'. !LG.' ._,.L.e-'-__..5.1...er� ��`•C. i� .. v - - ✓ �.�;. .i .._t�c?��14'�?1i1. f�:!.��Ji'�(�/LLB:tClLati�_.G =�:i� rn �Z.'rs�.� I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT OWE READ THIS APPLICATION AND THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON IT AND THE REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS ARE CORRECT. I CERTIFY THAT I AM ,THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THIS APPLICATION OR AN AGENT FULLY AUTHORIZED BY THE OWNER TO MAKE THIS APPLICATION . I: I)NDERSTAND . THAT IF ANY OF THE INFORMATION IN MY SUBMISSION IS FOUND TO BE EITHER INCORRECT OE2 INSUFFICIENT, THE APPLICATION MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA UNTIL SUCH INFORMATION IS PROVIDED. App cant ' s Signature Daty 8/87 mcm '2- airy Planning MD TERR Department NOTICE OF FILING NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to-the California Environmental Quality Act,.a Negative Declaration is hereby . filed on the below referenced project, on the basis that said project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: TTM-89-03, a tentative tract map subdividing 4.85 acres into 17 single family lots. This property is located in the City's R1-7.2 zone and within the General Plan's Low Density Residential landuse designation. APPLICANT: .Emblem Development Corporation\Jerry and Susan Irby LOCATION: 22738 Pico Street (APN #277-181-03) Copies of the Negative Declaration and Initial Study for this project are available for review at the City of Grand Terrace Planning Department, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace (714-824-6621). Anyone wishing to comment on this project may do so prior to October 25, 1989. All comments should be directed to David Sawyer, Community Development Director, City of Grand Terrace. David Sawyer, / Date Community Development Director. City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 124-6621 � C,ITr A Planning --,-'AD TERRAC Department NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Negative Declaration is hereby filed on the below referenced project, on the basis that said project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: TTM-89-03, a tentative tract map subdividing 4.85 acres into 17 single family lots. This property is located in the City's R1-7.2 zone and within the General Plan's Low Density Residential landuse designation (see attached map). APPLICANT: Emblem Development Corporation/Jerry and Susan Irby LOCATION: 22738 Pico Street (APN# 277-181-03) FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT: Based upon the attached Initial Study, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. David Sawyer, % Date Community Development Director City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 (714) 824-6621 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY I Background . 1 . Name of Proponent: City of Grand Terrace 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 Attention: David Sawyer, Planning Director 3. Date of Environmental Assessment: 4. Agency Requiring Assessment City of Grand Terrace 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable k_Tr-k -09 - �3 6. Location of Proposal: '�,�730 7\.CD S&-rp ✓E II Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are provided on attached sheets. ) Yes Maybe No 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? c. Substantial change in topography or . ground surface relief features? . d. The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or / physical features? J e. Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or or off site? ni Yes Maybe No f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or / the bed of the ocean or any bay, / inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground — failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterior- ation of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in / climate, whether locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and / amount of surface runoff? J c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water / in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water qual- ity, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or ` turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? y Yes Maybe No g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals , or through inter- ception of an aquifer by cuts or / excavations? h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? V 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, / crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species / of plants? V/ c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- / ment of existing species? d. Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including rep- tirles, fish and shellfish, benthic / organisms or insects) ? V/ b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? i c. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? I Yes Maybe No 6.- Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise / levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or — planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial increase in the rate of use / of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any non- renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? b. Possible interference with an emerg- ency response plan or an emergency / evacuation plan? 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? ^/ 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the pro- proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? i Yes Maybe No b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing — transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? IZ e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? V f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor / vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14, Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: / a. Fire protection? _ V b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational faci- lities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- quire the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities . Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Yes Maybe No b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? _ e. Storm water. drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential / health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity / of existing recreational opportunities? _ \/ 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeo- logical site? b'. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, / structure, or object? V/ c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? V i Yes Maybe No d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? _ V 21 . Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environ- ment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history / or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environ- mental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which oc- curs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future. ) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small , but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant. ) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substan- tial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a signi- ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi- ficant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on attached sheets have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on' the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. David Sawyer Planning 4irzector Date Signature For City of Grand Terrace i III. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1. b, 3 b The development of this predominantly vacant site will result in the over covering of a certain percentage of the soil. This impact will be mitigated by utilizing proper drainage methods which reviewed and approved by the Building and Engineering Department. 6. a The existing noise levels will increase as a result of the development of residential uses in an area that is predominantly vacant. This impact will be within the allowable levels as set in the Master Environmental Analysis for the General Plan and enforced through the City's Noise Ordinance. 8. The existing landuse will change from predominantly vacant land to single family residential uses in accordance with the adopted General Plan.