Loading...
08/16/2007 an GRAND TERRACE PLANNING comm ggf W Development Department IN I , , MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING (ALIfORNIA AUGUST 16, 2007 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission wac called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center. 22795 Barton Road. Grand Terrace. California. on Au sgu t 16, 2007 at 7:00 n.m., by Vice Chairman Addin on. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairperson Matthew Addington,Vice Chairperson Tom Comstock, Commissioner Darcy McNaboe,Commissioner Brian Phelps,Commissioner John Lampe,Associate Planner Rich Shields,Public Works Jerina Cordova,Planning Secretary ABSENT: Gary Koontz, Community Development Director 7:00 P.M. CONVENED SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance led by Tom Comstock • Roll Call • Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by the Chairman. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written request to be agendized to the Director of Community and Economic Development. No Public Participation at this time 1. SA-07-04/E-07-04: SA-07-04 and E-07-04 to construct a two-story, single family residence of 4,790 sq. ft. with a habitable "step-out" basement, two covered decks and a three-car garage. APPLICANT: Dale Chronister of Chronister Construction l 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 9 909/ 824-6621 LOCATION: The site consists of a .66 of an acre vacant lot located 23210 Twin Canyon Drive. (Northerly side of Twin Canyon Drive just east of 23180 Twin Canyon Drive.) RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing,receive testimony, close the public hearing, and approve SA-07-04 to construct a two-story, single family residence with basement and approve E-07-04 as a Class 3, Categorical Exemption. John Lampe, Associate Planner gives his staff report. The site is a vacant lot on the northerly side of Twin Canyon Drive. The property is a hillside lot and drops off steeply from the road. However it is developable on the westerly side. Custom built homes are usually built in this area and the Commission approved one about four months ago. Twin Canyon Drive is a private street without curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The zone is a very low density single family residential area with a minimum lot size of 20,000 sq. ft. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan and the Zoning. The site plan shows the location of the project. The house is set back 20 ft. from the road right of way and the property line. The normal set back is 25 ft. and therefore the applicant requested an Administrative Variance from the Planning Director. It is not out of character in this neighborhood to have set backs less than the minimum required. The floor plan of the first floor shows there will be a porch, foyer, family room, kitchen, pantry, deck, dining area, 2 bathrooms and a bedroom in the east wing of the house. The second floor will contain the master bedroom, master bathroom, walk in closets and a stairwell. The basement level will contain 2 bedrooms, family room and 3 '/z bathrooms. The front elevation shows a Contemporary architectural style with a Mediterranean influence with extensive window and door treatment. The rear elevation shows the deck and the columns supporting the deck. The height of the overall structure is 35 ft. and it meets the height limit for the zone. This will look like a two-story structure form the street level. The applicant will be using various ornamental trees around the structure along with lawn areas in the front going around to the back. There will be a fuel modification plan that will be in conformance with the Fire Department regulations. The grading plan shows the amount will be minimized for construction of the building,retaining walls and a step out foundation. There will not be a large pad around the structure. The applicant submitted a preliminary geotechnical study as well as a structural design study. They were reviewed by the Building and Safety Department and found adequate. The project has a .feasible design. The applicant is required to do a "SWPPP" plan as part of the grading permit process which he provided. l 2 Earth tone colors will be used on the stucco exterior, trim, and the roof tiles will be a Sunrise Blend. Staff believes these color materials are compatible to the surrounding neighborhood. The project qualifies for a Class 3 categorical exemption of the California Environment Quality Act. The staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the new,two-story single family residence with a step out basement supported by the findings of approval and subject to the recommended conditions of approval as set out in the Resolution of Approval. There were no questions from the Planning Commissioners. Chair Wilson opened up the public hearing however there were no requests. Chair Wilson closes the public hearing and brings it back to the Planning Commission for a motion or discussion. Vice Chair Addington wished to discuss Attachment 8. Vice Chair Addington requested additional decorative embellishments on the center of the house that goes with the theme of the house. MOTION PC-17-2007: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to amend the left side elevation of the residence to ad an architectural embellilshmerit. Commissioner Phelps seconded the motion to amend the left side elevation of the residence. VOTE: 4-0-1-0 Associate Planner invites the applicant to address the Commission. - DALE CHRONISTER 23210 Twin Canyon Drive Mr. Chronister reiterated Vice Chair Addington's. suggestion. Mr. Chronister agreed to the amendment. Commissioner Comstock asked the height of the retaining wall? Mr. Chronister explained the height. MOTION PC-18-2007: Vice Chair Addington made a motion approve with amendment to elevation Chair Wilson Seconded with amendment to elevation MOTION VOTE: 5-0-0-0 ADTOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 1. SUBJECT: General Plan Update Workshop (Preliminary draft of Land Use Element) Chair Wilson informed the public the workshop was being continued. He opened up the public participation. 3 PATRICIA FARLEY 12513 Michigan Street Ms. Farley was disappointed there were no copies of the draft for the public. Ms. Farley was concerned about stability in the community. She believes the property owners are going to be overruled on everything. The zoning of the. property on Michigan should have been light commercial and not general commercial. Ms. Farley does not believe that it is fair. Ms. Farley reflected back to the last meeting; alleging that Commissioner Mc Naboe asked about high density zone for seniors. Ms. Farley believes Mr. Schwab is leading her to believe that there will be another high density zone and will put them wherever he chose. People assume the senior center.was moved from Barton Road to Grand Terrace Road. It is not and we will have to build another low income project in our city and that is required by the agreement along with other affordable housing for low medium and medium density. None of which has been addressed. The stuff that has been allowed on Michigan Street would not be allowed by City Hall. Chair Wilson requested Ms. Farley wrap up her statement. Ms. Farley made an additional point regarding not standing up for property owners. Ms. Farley believes that she purchased in low density residential and she does not believe mixed use should be allowed. She believes that the City of Grand Terrace does not need to provide jobs here in the City. Ms. Farley wants the city to plan appropriately. RITA SCHWARK 21952 Grand Terrace Road Ms. Schwark did not receive the letter that was mailed out to the residence in her area regarding the General Plan update. She suggested certified mail the next time it is sent out. Ms. Schwark would like to see low density R.1 only if they can keep the agricultural overlay. She requested the exact definition on Option 3. Chair Wilson instructed staff to provide a definition of R.1 including Conditional Use Permit and R.2. Commissioner Comstock informed Ms. Schwark that she was included on the mailing list. BOBBI FORBES 11850 Burns Avenue Ms. Forbes did not receive a letter however she lives on the other side of the bridge. Last Friday the neighborhood met and they talked about the issue. Most of the residents do not understand. Ms. Forbes would like to be included on any future notices in that neighborhood. Chair Wilson reassured the public the next meeting would include definitions of R.1 & R.2 residential zones. 4 JEFF McCONNELL Walnut Avenue Mr. Mc Connell passed out a packet to the Planning Commission. Mr. McConnell had two items to discuss. First he supports placing the "agricultural overlay" zone back on the properties north of Vivienda near the Manhole site; and second,he would like to see the "agricultural overlay"placed on the parcels outlined on pages 32 and 33 of Assessor's Book 276 similar to those parcels at the end of Pico Street. These are the parcels below Palm, just east of Honeyhill. Mr. McConnell, besides the copies of maps of pages 32 and 33, submitted a petition signed by the property owners requesting "Agricultural Overlay" for the purpose of keeping horses. Mr. McConnell pointed out that there is a need for"horse"property which this proposal would help satisfy. Commissioner Addington thought this was a good idea and requested of staff a summary of the "Agricultural Overlay" including minimum lot sizes, numbers of horses allowed, etc. In addition, Commissioner Comstock requested the history of this area near Palm as to whether it has ever been in the "Agricultural Overlay"before. JANICE McSHINOFF 21816 Vivienda Avenue Ms. McShinoff needed clarification on Legal Non-Conforming regarding houses burning down and the allotted time to rebuild. John Lampe,Associate Planner explained it was 75% of the value of the structure and there is not a time limit to rebuild. BOBBI FORBES 11850 Burns Avenue Ms. Forbes is under the impression that you just have to have more than '/z acre to have horses and you don't have to have Agricultural Overlay. PATRICIA FARLEY 12513 Michigan Street Ms. Farley informed the Planning Commission her mother was always allowed to have lambs, horses, chickens & goats because that was allowed when she purchased the home. She believes there is a Health& Safety code that states it has to be-a certain distance from your neighbor. Ms. Farley believes that she should be able to talk as much as she wants during a workshop and she should be provided with copies of the workshop. Ms. Farley wants to see controls over mixed use. She does not want to end up like Loma Linda with High Density"box houses". Commissioner Comstock addressed a few of Ms. Farley's concerns. He assured Ms. Farley that he notes all of her concerns and although she may not like the answers she receives, they are being addressed. Chair Wilson explained the intention of the Planning Commission to not rush through the process and that it is important. 5 Ms. Farley felt she doesn't have time to analyze anything because she does not get the correct information. Vice Chair Addington suggested to Ms. Farley that she needed to mark up a Land Use Map as to what she thinks it should be. Ms. Farley does not have a problem with the color she has a problem with what they are. Vice Chair Addington wants her concern on paper because he can't visualize what Ms. Farley is discussing. WILLIAM KAMINSKY Burns/Vivienda Mr. Kaminsky wanted information on Specific Plans.- He questioned whether or not a Specific Plan can revert back to the original zone if it is not used with five to ten years. Chair Wilson explained the history of a Specific Plan. The point of a plan is to set the zoning for a particular area and depending on the conditions of that specific plan;if it is not used it will have an expiration date. Mr. Kaminsky shared his experience with Specific Plans while working for the City of Colton. Chair Wilson informs Mr. Kaminsky that a Specific Plan is a legal document that must be in compliance with the General Plan. PATRICIA FARLEY 12513 Michigan Street Ms. Farley believes it time consuming to go to every meeting and feels that information should be correct. The public needs to be informed about everything including zoning since it is being -- changed every two and one half years. Commissioner Comstock corrects Ms. Farley and informs her that the zoning is not changed every two years;it is reviewed. Ms. Farley wants to know what is "one unit attached", "one unit detached" and "two units attached" Chair Wilson requests the staff to bring back the information to the continued workshop. • Information to Commissioners Rich Shields informed the Planning Commission that the Red Light Cameras were energized and the City would be giving out warning tickets for one month (as of August 14,2007) and after that tickets will be given out. Vice Chair Addington wanted an explanation on the cameras on Barton Road and Mt. Vernon. Rich Shield explained that Red Flex set it up north and south only and north on Michigan Street only. Vice Chair Addington was under the impression the City was trying to slow down traffic that was cutting through town but it appears that it's set up to ticket the residents of Grand Terrace. Rich Shields said the City was taking small steps and explained the City has opportunity to add more if the City Council desired. Rich Shields said you will have to remember when you enter the intersection there will be trigger points at the end limit line; if your bumper goes past that and it is in the red zone you will get a ticket; if you enter while in the yellow zone you will not get a ticket. Commissioner Comstock is concerned about not having lines in the street. 6 Vice Chair Addington wants status on the Town Square Project. John Lampe, Associate Planner informed Mr. Addington that the developer has been talking to the City. Richard Shields informed the Planning Commission that he is working with the developer and a filing is in the near future. ADTOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 6.2007 Respectfully Submitted, Approve , Gary I�Koont2fflanning Director Doug Wilson Planning Commission Chairman l vs 7