Loading...
10/15/2009 i II' f Community and Economic Development Department ! ' (ALIFORNIA GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING October 15, 2009 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 October 15,2009, at 6:30 u.m.,by Chairman Doug Wilson.. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairman Matthew Addington, Vice Chairman Darcy McNaboe, Commissioner Tom Comstock, Commissioner Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development Director Sandra Molina, Senior Planner 6:30 P.M.: CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairman Wilson convened the Site and Architectural Review Board/Planning Commission meeting. • Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance • 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 GENERAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None t Page 1 of 20 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • 909/ 824-6621 ITEMS: 1.1 MINUTES: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of June 4, 2009 RECOMMENDATION: Approval Commissioner Comstock — These are regarding the motions that are made and I realize we were having some problems with the tape deck and recording was inaudible. I am referring first to page 11 in the minutes, it says Motion PC 16-2009 Commissioner Comstock made a motion for the applicant to "a consist wall pursuant". I think that it is suppose to read something along the line of, "made a motion for the applicant to construct a wall pursuant to the approved conditions of approval, and will have to work'the details out with staff'. Then I have another correction, it's on page 13, under Director Powers, it says there that "motion withstands with 2-2 with one Commissioner abstaining", I was wondering if we were able to reflect, I'm sorry let's move on, I just realized what was going on. I made a mistake on that one. Then on the last page, 14, under Commissioner Comstock it says per notes, "like the landscaping along Mt. Vernon Avenue and would like to encourage continued project", maybe we can say the "infill landscape projects". There are some patches along Mt. Vernon that do not have the Lantana landscaping and that is what I was asking if we could infill those places that don't currently have Lantana and that's what I had to add to this. Chairman Wilson —recognizes the attendance of Vice Chair Addington. Do we have any other comments in relation to the minutes of June 4, 2009? Director Joyce Powers —We did have one comment from the public that I provided to you if I may have your permission to read it into the record. Received, October 131h, subject states June 4, 2009 minutes. Correspondence reads: I just read the Planning Commission minutes of June 4, 2009 that I have been waiting for to be approved. I can't understand how these minutes have so many inaudible comments. I spoke very clearly and so did other people at the meeting. I don't think these minutes should be approved in the context they are typed up on the agenda and I would like to have them redone. Also there were a lot of mistakes with people's names. I would appreciate it if you would give this information to the Planning Commission as I am not able to attend the meeting on Thursday evening, signed Barbara Berliner. Thank you. Chairman Wilson —The Chair would entertain—a motion, I mean there is no question about the fact we had a technical difficulty that we are dealing with here but I think what we are trying convey here in relation to the walls I believe we already constructed a good percentage of the wall and what we were trying to accomplish has been accomplished. Unless there is something from the public that says I did not get what I wanted I think the intent has been covered even though we have a problem with the technical aspect of the minutes. Let me ask a question because I understand this to be true. I think we have replaced some equipment and solved the technical problem. Page 2 of 20 MOTION PC 29-2009 Vice Chairman Addingtion made a motion for approval of June 4th, 2009, minutes, with changes that Commissioner Comstock included. Second by Commissioner Comstock. Commissioner McNaboe—My only comment to fall under what you say, I think that when we have verbatim minutes it really shows up when we have technical difficulties but I do believe the intent was conveyed that we wanted the wall built as stipulated and that was the decision we made.- Commissioner Comstock — Mr. Chairman, let me also say for the public's benefit that notes were taken at this meeting,hand written notes, and there are places, where inaudible on tape, that were filled in, there was material in the hand written notes that they were able to get the gist of the idea. That's what we are talking about. Motion carries 4-0, Commissioner Bailes absent. r ,1 1.2 MINUTES: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of Junel8, 2009 RECOMMENDATION: Approval MOTION PC 30-2009 Vice Chairman Addingtion made a motion for approval of June 18t",2009 minutes. Second by Commissioner McNaboe. Motion carries 3-0, Commissioner Comstock abstaining and Commissioner Bailes absent 1.3 MINUTES: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July2, 2009 RECOMMENDATION: Approval MOTION PC 31-2009 Vice Chairman Addingtion made a motion for approval of July 2, 2009 minutes. Page 3 of 20 Second by Commissioner McNaboe. Chairman Wilson — If I might mention, one thing that is outstanding at least in these minutes and probably at least the year, we have had pretty decent attendance and I think the Commissioners should be applauded for that because it's not always easy and so I really appreciate the attendance. In this particular item July 2, shows me as absent and I was gravely ill at the time and appreciate you, Vice Chair Addington, taking care of the duties. Motion carries 3-0, Chairman Wilson abstaining and Commissioner Bailes absent. 2. SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-01 APPLICANT: Lee Swertfeger, Owner LOCATION: 12438 Michigan Street Review of the Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 99-01 RECOMMENDATION: Direct the Applicant to complete the Project Conditions of Approval within 60 calendar days. Director Powers — Good evening Commissioners this is an update on the condition of approval for the project at 12438 Michigan Street. That CUP was first approved in 2001, to allow truck repair and operate and expand facilities for self unloading trailer manufacturing repair and sales. As provided in the information to you, there were subsequent approvals that were extensions for meeting the conditions, the last one being February 20, 2003 which required full completion of the items by January 18, 2004. Our records also indicate that the applicant has been notified on several occasions that the property was non compliant so'what we are doing this evening is offering you an update and asking for your consideration to not necessarily extend the CUP, that is not appropriate because it cannot be extended, the requirement expired in the 2004; rather to consider putting the matter over for a public hearing to consider revocation of the CUP. The property owner is here to address the Commission as well as several parties who live in the area. The remaining items listed on the top of page two, the four items, the first one, the stripping on Michigan Street that has been completed. That was completed Monday or Tuesday of this week, the other items the trash enclosure, the gravel, that landscaping has not. Thank you. Vice Chairman Addington — On this project in looking at who attended the meetings through the various resolutions, my name showed up once, but I could've sworn this issue came before the body where I was part of Planning Commission at least three times. Nothing occurred on this in 2005 or 2004? Director Powers — The only item we found dated in 2005 is a staff memorandum talking about the items that were still out of compliance. Page 4 of 20 Vice Chairman Addington—That may be one of the items I recall that. Thank you. Lee Swertfeger, 22438 Michigan St. — I purchased this property in 1964. I lived in Grand Terrace all my life. My dad was in the trucking business in Grand Terrace. I have been involved in trucking all my life. I've never changed the type of work I do, the only reason this project has lagged so long, held back, is because of funds. It's always been a struggle for me because we started with nothing and we've always gone in full force over our head and especially with the recession we are going through now. We have another location also up in Pixley, California and it's pretty tough right now keeping both up and going. We went from 43 mechanics down to 13 mechanics. It's pretty hard to keep your doors open when something like that happens. Nobody wants this project completed more than we do. We understand the City has been very, very patient with this. We really apologize for taking so long but we tried always to be in compliance with what the City has asked. We will continue to do anything the City asks, we have no problems whatsoever with the City. We beg of you to help us keep this thing going because my whole family is involved, this has always been a family project, they have always been involved and we just need help. Chairman Wilson — I am just curious because I know a lot of different businesses have been affected by this economic downturn. What would you name as one of the major influences that has affected your business, because I am not familiar with the trucking business at all. I have some friends that are in it, but you ask me what happens to construction I can tell you right now — what happens. Lee Swertfeger—Well when this all started we were probably selling at least four new trailers a week and these trailers are sixty to seventy thousand dollars apiece. Now we have not sold one for a year. Chairman Wilson—So the demand for the trailers has gone down? Lee Swertfeger — Right. We have two brand new trailers that are three years old and we can't sell them. We have tried giving them away at our cost and we can't sell them. That's just the sales. The repairs are pretty much the same thing. At first when this thing really got bad, a year ago, people were absolutely not repairing their trailer. They just quit. Now they are repairing, they just have to keep them going. So we are getting minimal jobs just enough to keep us going. Things just in the last couple of weeks have started looking a lot better at both locations. When you go through what we have gone through it takes a long time to recover because you end up owing way more than you did to start with. We've buckled down and cut back everyway we can and we are going to survive one way or another if we can get through this problem with the City. Chairman Wilson — Let me go through the items here. We have construction of a trash enclosure. Some of the slag and gravel has been removed and must be replaced, that's kind of a maintenance item. Vines required for screening have not been installed on the south side. I guess I missed that when I went over there. The north boundary it just partially completed. I don't see a big dollar attached to any one of those maybe the trash enclosure, but respectively speaking, I don't think there is a ton of money involved there. I'm sure you've already taken care of the Page 5 of 20 striping. Are you agreeable to the terms of the sixty day allowance to be able to take care of those items? Lee Swertfeger—Yes. Chairman Wilson — Very good. I think it is important because there was a change that took place with the building and maybe you can explain to this body what happened. I know it's something that happened with the previous administration before Joyce Powers became our CEDD but the building changed from something that this body approved to a more severe structure; and maybe you can explain to us what took place there. Lee Swertfeger— We were going to do one building at a time and make two buildings out of it, which would have been better for us in way because we would not have had to put fire protection in because of the square footage. After going through all of our plans and everything we realized it would be more reasonable for us to make it all one building, a lot easier for us to work in the building. So that is only change I know of. Chairman Wilson — Well didn't it change from the kind of material it was? Wasn't it a metal building at one point then became a block building? Lee Swertfeger—Yes, you are right. Chairman Wilson — So you started out with a couple of metal buildings and then I believe through an administrative procedure with the previous CEDD it became a block building all in one 12,000 square feet and because of that it ended up with a fire sprinkler system requirement; and now we are at a point where the building permit has lasaped or expired and because of lack of funds you were not able to finish the fire sprinkler system or the rollup doors and both of those are significant costs, estimated at $26,000 at this point. That building, the last time I saw it was about a year ago, and it was significantly finished but it wasn't done and at that point it wasn't being used. I would assume our City staff has double checked. It is pretty easy to tell whether a building is being used and it's still not being used because it is not completed it is not final. So that's were we are at with those. Everybody tuned up at this point? Alright. So you are agreeable to the items that need to be fixed? Do you have any kind of an ETA in relation to the completion of the building although it is unrelated to the CUP. Lee Swertfeger — It's very tough because of funds. If business keeps going like it's going right now I would say, which is very good by the way, I would say it's still going to take six months to recover and get back on our feet were we are starting to see our business profitable. Chairman Wilson— So it could be inside a year to a year and a half. Do you have anything else you wanted to mention in relation to this item before we go on to the general public? Lee Swertfeger—I wish I could hear the general public complaints first. Chairman Wilson — We'll give you an opportunity to respond. Well if there are no other questions from the Planning Commissioners, we are going to keep this real civil because I know Page 6 of 20 this can become an emotional issue. What I would like to do in our quest is to get the items of concern out in the open and then address them one at a time. Then this body can do what it is charged to do. Stacey West, 12438 Michigan Street — I'm basically going off what my father has said. My father is Lee Swertferger, and everything we have tried to do. If you guys had seen our property five, ten years ago it looked like a junk yard. You would be driving by and it was just dirt and junk. It was bad and we agreed to make improvements and we have. You drive by now and you're not sure what is there. You can see we have made the street improvements, that whole facility has changed a lot and we have never wavered on what we did at the beginning to what we do now, it has always been the same thing. I wish the economy wasn't as bad as it is right now because I would love to get rid of this headache, but anyways we deal with what we are dealt with. I noticed that some statements have been said as far as our business and I don't see any damage done to the area, any severe damage that we, our business, have caused to this area. I don't see it at all. If anything we have made major improvements to the area. We are in the proper zone for what we are doing. That is my main thing, we are just here to do our job and we all live in the city, we're part of the community. Commissioner Comstock — Can you tell me how many people are employed at the firm you own? Stacey West—At the firm here,we are 16. Commissioner Comstock—So that is 16 families that are being affected. Stacey West—Correct, absolutely, our family that consists of three different families. Chairman Wilson—Any other questions for Stacey? No, I guess that is it. Laura Austin, 12356 Michigan Street—I mainly wanted to speak about that building but first I wanted to, what she just said, that they have cleaned it up and taken the trash out. That's great, I understand they did but it's still an eye sore. When you read from the first one they took out this license and permits, it stated that there were suppose to be screening by planting on all sides. It isn't beautiful when you drive down Michigan. All you can see are trailers. They are huge and they park them right at the front so that you can not miss them, these huge trailers. They are not beautiful to me, I live just a few doors from it and this is just one of their problems and saying that it is zoned for them it's zoned for them but it was done when they asked for the license. That was not commercial, that was residential and so now the City either needs to go in and take that whole street and either make us all commercial or all residential. It's a mix match. One of my concerns is that building that they put in. It has been over ten years since they have been there and they haven't met one deadline yet. It's been extension, after extension, after extension. A homeowner would not get that and they are running on an extension being expired. That building has not been finished, they have not gotten a completion on it which means that is has not gone onto the tax rolls so they are not paying property taxes on that building and how do we know the City does go in there. How do we know that building is not being used? They could leave it vacant the next hundred years and use it and not pay the proper taxes. I understand that the Page 7 of 20 - biggest part of not completing that building is the fire, O.K. I live like I said a couple doors from it. We don't need a large fire in there and you can't tell me that the things they have got in there and the hazardous waste that's in there is not a fire hazard. It may not seem like it to anyone else because you don't live two doors from them but it sure is to us. I don't want to hear those fire sirens at midnight and I think Mr. Swertfeger and I feel sorry for him, I know the economy is bad but when we had the big thing about the overnight truckers in there he got up and fought that argument and said they were doing so much for the City they were bringing in all these taxes in for the City, where are the taxes then if they are doing that bad. You know it was puffed up then, it helped them and now all of a sudden being down in the economy that's supposed to help them break the rules again. I don't feel that should be given any extensions for anything. If you want to stay in business there complete it. A homeowner would have not been given that courtesy and those extensions and be allowed to stay there without those things being completed. Thank you very much. Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street—My parents purchased property where I live and my mother live in 1950. The purpose of the Planning Commission and a General Plan is to protect homeowners from the trash that's been allowed on Michigan. My parents purchase their property in 1950 and all of that property along there was supposed to be light commercial. When Mr. Swertfeger came in and requested to have a CUP for this business he missed stated what was allowed and it's in the record, the legal record, what he said was relied upon and nobody bothered to check and see that it wasn't correct. That was a gross violation of my parent's rights and all the other homeowners there who have lived there for many years. Also Mr. Swertfeger had an odd little businesses going where it wasn't clear what he was doing, he had nuts and bolts, he had a trash business from what I understand with a bunch of junk in the back. None of that was ever allowed. When he asked for the CUP he specifically said, if you look carefully through the file, it made it sound like it was a small business only, six cars at the most and things like this. What he has there looks like a truck junk yard and he parks trucks around strategically so you won't see the worst of it but I have seen it. Who in this City would be allowed to have the trashy, run down bungalows and things out in the field, they were supposed to shield it from the neighbors. Why do we have a big truck right by the road all lit up at night, we all have to look at it. This project was based on inaccurate information, it was based on a General Plan that the City was negligent and I have pointed this out to you about changes being made in the General Plan without it legally being processed. Mr. Swertfeger has changed residential to a business, nuts and bolts. He keeps changing things but yet look at the tax record, look at the tax record and look at the property description from a number of years ago where somebody, as far as I know, has illegally changed the description of how this property can be used. Now all of this stuff has to go through public hearings without proper information and all the residents affected notified. There was not proper notification and even what he represented from what I see in the file that was presented is unlike what he has there. He also was told a long time ago that he was not to be doing. There's pollution, and he was not to be doing this business outside and he continues to do it outside because he is not using the building and you're authorizing him to continue blatantly violating it. I am sorry, I feel sorry for people that have trouble with there business but he doesn't have the right to hurt all of the residents. He is hurting that whole area of Grand Terrace. He's destroying it. It is mainly residential and that business is exactly the kind of stuff that you are ` supposed to prevent and I should not have to come here to tell you not to allow that in residential. I am appalled that this was ever approved. Also he was told specifically that this was Page 8 of 20 not a permanent CUP, and he has played this game and gotten extension after extension. I talked to Mr. Schwab about it and even though the law was right in front of us Mr. Schwab was making his own interpretation to allow illegal extensions way beyond what is. This man should not get one minute more of an extension. This is at that expense of everybody in the community. Anybody that said this was not damaging, either visual or pollution-wise to the neighborhood is lying. This whole thing has been based on false information and I demand you stop it. Chairman Wilson —Any other comments on this item? Then we will bring it back to close the Public Comment and bring it back to the Commission for discussion, motion? Vice Chairman Addington—Does this require a motion? Chairman Wilson — First thing we are going to do is let the, before we close it, let me reverse that. Let'-s let the applicant, Mr. Swertfeger, come up and address a couple of the comments and let's keep it short. I think we have established the fact that the three items that need to be completed will be completed within a sixty day time frame and we have established something in relation to the 12,000 square foot building that is represented as not being used at this time. Other than that, Mr. Swertfeger I'd invite you to come to the podium. I'd like to know one thing just for personal information. The last time I was there, there had been some County Health Inspections in relation to toxic and so on. I know, usually, they can be complaint driven, in this case it was not a complaint driven item; it was a regular inspection. The last one I know of was in 2007, plus or minus, and at that time the Fire Department double-checked to see how compliance was met over a period of time and they were satisfied and signed that off. Have there been any other County inspections since that time? We will invite your daughter to come up and answer that question. Stacey West—We actually have annual inspections and, yes, we even have the emergency lock box that is required. Because the building itself is masonry and there is nothing it, so as far as a fire hazard right now there is nothing to worry about. However, as far as chemicals, it is very limited which that states in the report from the County. Chairman Wilson—Do you know approximately what the date of the latest inspection was? Stacey West—I believe it was June 2008. Chairman Wilson — Have those records been made available to the City so that we can do proper coordination? Stacey West—Yes, I requested that the County Fire Department e-mail them to me so I could e- mail to the City as I did. Chairman Wilson—Thank you, very well. Any other questions of the applicant and feel free to respond and kind of keep them to the technical aspect if we can. Commissioner Comstock — I have a couple of questions if I may. Nuts and bolts, can you address that please. Page 9 of 20 Lee Swertfeger—I am not sure what that means. Commissioner Comstock — Has that been a part of your business where you were selling nuts and bolts? Stacey West — Nuts and bolts as fasteners, we use them to repair the trailers. So if a customer wants to come in for parts, yes, we sell them. But it's within our smaller building that it already there and that has been there since the 70's. Commissioner Comstock — Can you address the issue of some kind of trash business, trash hauling? Stacey West — I have no clue where she got that from. We've never been in the trash business. We do repair the walking floor trailers that haul the trash, like for Burrtec Waste, Aspens Disposal, Ecology that type of thing, otherwise we do not haul trash. Commissioner Comstock — Can you also address the use of property and the business related concerns? Have you always been a trucking company? Stacey West—It's not necessarily a truck company it's a trailer company and we repair and sell trailers. Yes, we have our customer that drop off and pick up their trucks. Commissioner Comstock = But you haven't changed your use since you've been on the property? Stacey West—No. Chairman Wilson—Mr. Swertfeger, can you address the issue of the trailers up toward the front of the fence, because I do know that I brought that up when I did a site inspection. I felt it might be appropriate to pull those trailers back from the front because they do affect the aesthetic value of the area and let's face it, it was a residential area primarily. Can you address that? Lee Swertfeger — Yes, we can do that if that's a request. The one trailer out front was in the original plan to put it on the show slab out there, that's a brand new trailer. Things that look good to some people don't look good to others and I apologize for that. The first lady that spoke, when she bought property we were there we had trailers on the property. My dad had a trucking company in Grand Terrace in 1942. Stacey West — As far as the zoning, no, the zoning was not changed for us. The zoning was originally M-1. Lee Swertfeger—When I brought the property it was M-1 property and that is why I bought it. We had other residential property in Grand Terrace, sold that and bought the M-1 zone so we could build that. Page 10 of 20 Chairman Wilson — Now I think what you are talking about may have been a county designation, is that correct? Lee Swertfeger—Yes. Chairman Wilson — And that was your understanding at the time. Any other items that you would like to try to address before we close the public portion? Lee Swertfeger—When we started we worked outside, we were never told from day one that we couldn't work outside. It was our decision to put up the building to keep the noise down so we wouldn't have a problem. So we felt we were making the property better. Chairman Wilson — Thank you very much. As long as it's on topic but I tell you we are not going to get into a big emotional thing or I'll shut you off. Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan — Hammerlift has been advertising on a website that their business is being run on this property and it has a business license. There are so many things like this that people are just taking these people's word and the fact and the documents do not support it. I have relatives that have lived on Michigan for a long, long time. We all know this was not a trucking business. They had a truck parked there that was illegally parked and it said nuts and bolts. Check there business licenses through all the years did they even pay for a business license. They said it was an established business; then prove it with business licenses that were approved. Chairman Wilson—Thank you. We will close the public discussion on this item and move back to Planning Commission for discussion and motion. Commissioner Comstock—I have a question of staff if I may. Have you inspected the property Director Powers? Director Powers —Not within the property line, I could not honestly tell you whether or not the building was occupied. Commissioner Comstock—Do we have anybody on staff who has visited the property? I know when the former Director and John Lampe were here they had been down to look at the property. Do we have anybody currently on staff that's been down recently? Director Powers—Yes we do. For NPDES, Matt Wirz, inspects that property for that purpose. Commissioner Comstock — Has there been compliance with the zoning regulations and requirements? I just want to know if there has been any, if the business is not in compliance with what they should be then we need to know that. Director Powers — I have looked into the Hammerlift operation and we're not able to confirm that they actually operating out of that location, other licenses has expired and they did not renew it this year. Our understanding is because they are no long working from that site Page 11 of 20 Chairman Wilson—Any other further discussion from staff or discussion general? Vice Chairman Addington—Well discussion in general, if you could just answer my question I would appreciate it. Their CUP is expired and it's been expired for approximately 5 years. The recommendation that you are proceeding with, does that recommendation require a consensus or does it require a motion? Director Powers — The CUP is not expired, what is expired is the requirement to complete the conditions. The CUP is still valid, therefore I have in my recommendation that the Planning Commission may consider setting the matter for a public hearing. The Code, Title 18, does provide a certain procedure to revoke the conditional use permit and it does begin with a public hear of the Planning Commission. Chairman Wilson — And we are correct in assuming that items 2, 3, 4 are the remaining items that staff has found that are not in compliance so far as the CUP conditions? Director Powers—Yes. Chairman Wilson — The building permit is a separate item all together, it does not have anything to do with the CUP. Director Powers—Yes. Chairman Wilson —Any other questions of staff? If not, the Chair would entertain a motion on this item. Senior Planner Molina—Before a motion is made I wanted to remind the Commission that we did receive some e-mail correspondence. I inadvertently labeled them as Item 2.2 but they are Item 2.1, so they are applicable to this item. Chairman Wilson — The opportunity to give the Planning Commission to review these items. Point to October 15, 2009, note from Sharon Abbott to Joyce Powers, the lack of material, including a memorandum to Gary Koontz from John Lampe dated January 24, 2005. Commissioner Comstock— In the memorandum that Mrs. Abbott submitted, the memorandum from John Lampe to Gary Koontz, it says here that the requirement that the proposed 12,000 square foot be subject to a separate Site and Architectural Review, my understanding is that was done already? Am I not correct in that understanding? Director Powers—That's my understanding as well Commissioner Comstock. Commissioner Comstock— It also notes here that some 38 conditions on the site were imposed by the Planning Commission and I am assuming that all of those but the 4 that we had or is now down to 3 have been completed? Page 12 of 20 Director Powers—Yes. Commissioner McNaboe—I have a question regarding this memorandum as well. Further down on the memo it starts off with violation of zoning code and storing truck trailers and heavy equipment on residential lot immediately south. But this is in 2005, is this still on going? Director Powers — That last item has been corrected and it pertained to the 12,000 square foot building. Of course except for the fact the building has not been completed. One of the notes in this memorandum indicates that a condition related to NPDES violations may have caused the construction of the 12,000 square foot building that the vehicles were at the time parked on pervious surfaces. Commissioner McNaboe — My other questions was about the NPDES and so because the building is not being used is there still a violation there? Director Powers — The last report from the City staff person that conducts those inspections indicates there is no longer a violation. Chairman Wilson—Any other questions of staff? Chair would entertain a motion. Commissioner Comstock — Mr. Chairman I am not certain what you are looking for as far as motion is concerned. Chairman Wilson —Well, I believe what our action is, is to vote on whether or not we grant a 60 day extension for the remaining items to be completed and whether or not we would consider a revocation of the CUP. See down here on your recommendations. Commissioner McNaboe—Where does the public hearing enter into this process? Chairman Wilson—This is a review of the CUP and compliance of the CUP. Commission McNaboe—As far as the recommendation is concerned would that be after the 60 days considering the revocation?Would that be a public hearing at that point? Chairman Wilson—Correct. Vice Chairman Addington — Considering for the years that we have listened to the residents surrounding this subject site, I will take a shot here at making a recommendation, if clarification needs to be made on the recommendation to make it correct, I would appreciate a correction from staff. I here by would like to make the motion that if the applicant has not completed all the requirements within 60 days from today's motion, excluding the fire sprinkler system, the Planning Commission may consider the revocation of the CUP and move forward to a public hearing. Chairman Wilson — I would like amend that to include the roll up doors, so I think what we should probably do is exclude the 12,000 square foot building from that. Page 13 of 20 Vice Chairman Addington — I would agree to that, I would like to amend my motion accordingly. Chairman Wilson—Do we have second on that? Commissioner Comstock—I second that motion. Chairman Wilson—So we have motion on the floor and a second. Do we have any discussion? Commissioner McNaboe—Just a clarification. So that's sixty days to complete items two, three and four on our list and at the end of that sixty days what happens? We come back and we say these have not been done yet? Vice Chairman Addington—If they have not been completed we listen to report from staff and at that point we would move into a public hearing for the project or the relocation of the CUP. Is that correct? Director Powers—We can make a report back to the Commission in 30 days. We would like the matter turned over for public hearing as quickly as possible if there has been no compliance. So if it has not been completed by the sixty day we would like to schedule that public hearing. Vice Chairman Addington—O.K., thank you. l Senior Planner Molina — If I may just a point of clarification, our Code does states that the Planning Commission would conduct a public hearing and they would make a recommendation whether to revoke the CUP or not and that gets forwarded to the City Council so the ultimate decision would be the Councils. Vice Chairman Addington—Thank you, I appreciate the clarification. MOTION PC 32-2009 Vice Chairman Addington makes motion that if the applicant has not completed all the requirements within 60 days from today's motion, excluding the fire sprinklers system and roll up doors for the 12,000 square foot building, the Planning Commission may consider the revocation of the CUP and move forward to a Public Hearing.. Second by Commissioner Comstock. Motion carries 3-1, with Commission McNaboe voting No and Commission Bailes Absent. Chairman Wilson—You know what you got to do Mr. Swertfeger, please do so. Page 14 of 20 2.2 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Procedures Manual RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and direct staff on any additional changes to the Planning Commission Procedures Manual. Chairman Wilson—Do we have a staff report? Director Powers — Yes, Chair Wilson, thank you. I am going to introduce you to Katie Chamberlain she's going to be giving this report for us this evening. She is new with our staff and has been working really hard on this handbook for you and she's the one that's most in the know about the topic. Katie Chamberlain — Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. The item brought before you and this evening is the update and revision of the Planning Commission Procedures Handbook. As discussed in the September 3, 2009 meeting that Handbook is outdated and in need of an update. Staff has reviewed and revised the document and is bringing it before you tonight for discussion and review. Also included in your packets are Attachment A, the redline version of the Planning Commission Handbook, Attachment B a list of various reference websites that may be of benefit to the Commission, and also Attachment C with a League of California Cities Planning Handbook for your reference. It is recommended by Staff that the Planning Commission discuss the Handbook revisions and provide input on any - .. additional changes to staff. That concludes my report. Chairman Wilson—Everybody get a chance to actually review through these various items. Commissioner Comstock—Very thorough, you did a good job. Chairman Wilson—Any discussion with staff in relation to any of the items. Commission McNaboe—I have one item. On page 9, there is an agreement issue between item E and item F. With the changes, you have the Chairman declaring the Public Hearing is concluded and that there is more questions and answer and rebuttal but then in item F the Chairman is declaring the Public Hearing closed. I think that the issue was changing the audience participation portion of the Public Hearing being concluded for that is what is being struck out, the audience participation portion of it. I think it doesn't agree and fall in line with item F. I'm not sure why the choice was made to strike that portion. Senior Planner Molina — Mr. Chairman, if I may. I understand what Commission McNaboe is indicating. Typically once the audience participation is closed that in essence closes the Public Hearing. To make it in agreement what Staff would recommend is to strike out paragraph F because in essence you close the Public Hearing and the discussion is back between the members of the Commission and any member of staff. So that's what is suggested and then if the Commission agrees then we can make that change. Vice Chairman Addington—I could concur with that recommendation. Page 15 of 20 Chairman Wilson — Any other questions Commissioner McNaboe. Vice Chair Addington you had several items. Vice Chairman Addington — Yes, thank you. On page 5 there is wonderful quotation from Thomas Jefferson, I recommend we keep that quotation. On page 19 under 7.4 the last paragraph under reconsider, in case of a reconsider a 1 yes, 1 no, 3 abstain vote may pass a motion to reconsider, is that out of Roberts Rule of Order or where did this come from? I have never heard of a 1-1-3 passing? Senior Planner Molina—We believe it is out of Roberts Rules of Order but we will verify that because if you look at the original wording that is when there was a seven member board and so it was tie basically. We will verify, in case of a tie it would pass as a motion. What we will do is verify that this is proper voting tally. Vice Chairman Addington—O.K. I would appreciate that, that one was a little confusing to me. On page 20 in the last motion in red it read in the third line, "then in a full commission shall be automatically reconsidered to the next council meeting", is this a Council or Commission? Was that a type or is this meant to go to the Council? Senior Planner Molina—It is a typo. Vice Chairman — Then on page 21, were making a change "the Planning Commission at the first meeting following June 30th of each year shall select one member to service as Chairman and one of it's member to service as Vice Chairman". Why is it recommended we change this from a two year to a one year term? Senior Planner Molina — The Municipal Code is written this way and so we wanted to be consistent with the procedure established in the Muni Code for the administration of the Planning Commission. Vice Chairman — Well that answers the question. I appreciate that I didn't know the Municipal Code said that. Also on attachment B on the link to the introduction to Robert's Rule of Order, I typed that link in and that did not go anywhere. If you can get that link to me I would greatly appreciate it. Those were my comments. Thank you for your time. Chairman Wilson — I know this is going to be quite a bit out of character for me but I am noticing a tendency toward gender specific, is there some place in this document do we have something that refers to how we handle the terms Chairman as Chairperson or anything like that somewhere? Director Powers — No Chair Wilson we do not. I think it's appropriate to modify that same person. Chairman Wilson — Thank you. I just think it's appropriate in relation to any of these kinds of situations. Commissioner Comstock did you have any questions or comments? Page 16 of 20 Commissioner Comstock—No. Chairman Wilson — I am hearing none other. Bring this matter back to the Planning Commission for further discussion or direction? Senior Planner Molina — Mr. Chairman what staff was looking for is if the Commission is in accordance with the changes they have asked us to make. The motion would be to direct staff to make the revisions and bring it back to the Commission as an action item for approval. Commissioner Comstock—So moved. Vice Chairman Addington—I will second that. MOTION PC 33-2009 Commissioner Comstock made motion to direct staff to make the discussed revisions and bring the item back for Plannign Commission approval. Second by Vice Chairman Addington Motion carries.4-0,with Commission Bailes absent. ADJOURN PUBLIC WORKSHOP 4 INFORMATION TO COMMISSIONERS Director Powers — The first thing is on the very last line of your agenda it states that your next meeting would be held November the 4th, that's actually a Wednesday. For the record that will be on November the 5th. I also wanted to share with you our progress on the Compass Blueprint Project. If you recall it was SCAG that provided the funding for the project. We did interview the consultants that responded to the proposals last week and we have selected a company and they are in the process of negotiating the contract and completing that with SCAG so we can get started very quickly. Vice Chairman Addington—Which project was this, I'm sorry. Director Powers — We had applied to SCAG for the Compass Blueprint Project to update the Barton Road Specific Plan and to include more regional traffic issues as opposed to just Barton Road. We have selected a company call Hogle Ireland. I was very pleased with there proposal and they should be kicking that off very soon. ---, Chairman Wilson—Any other items to the Commissioners? Page 17 of 20 5. INFORMATION FROM COMMISSIONERS Vice Chairman Addington — The only one I have is the medical center building that was to go in at Preston and Barton Road, I take it that project has just died out? Director Powers — The developer is not able to reduce the cost of development to the point where revenue earned from either sales of condominium offices or leases justify the construction of the project at this point. Vice Chairman Addington — As I was walking by there the other day, before the rains, it looked like their storm water quality measures were failing. You may want to have someone go out and look at that. Chairman Wilson — First off I'd like to find out what kind of progress we are making on our affordable efforts because I know we did have an entity that was interested in providing some of the affordable that we owe ourselves, and I believe there has been a great deal of discussion. I'm hoping they are close to an application. It is not necessary to give a full report at this point but if you no know some information on it I would be glad to hear it. Director Powers — Chair Wilson and Commissioners you are correct, they are close to an application. They've also conducted some inquiries and plan to apply for HOME funds to assist with the funding of the project. Most recently I have asked the developer to provide a written scope of development and schedule for the project so we can start to prepare a draft development agreement. Chairman Wilson—That is good news. Commissioner Comstock—Which project is was that? Chairman Wilson — We got about 3 or4 likely parcels in the City that could be identified as affordable items and we are actually in the process of almost crafting our definition on how affordable is going to work within the city because right now the top end of our density is 12 units to the acre and that does not pencil real well with an affordable cushion. It's a whole new world, it's like a whole underlying situation that is really technical and has to do with public funding and so on and partnership with the City to be able to meet these requirement s just like every jurisdiction. I will note that Dr. Ha's project has been measurably cleaned up and I would applaud that effort and I would like to applaud staff and in particular Rich Shields as I look back in the notes in the minutes he had commented that he would make sure that things get cleaned up over there and whoever's efforts are responsible for including Rich, I appreciate that effort. But do we have any update in relation to Dr. Ha? I think I know the answer to a lot of things but I would like to know where the City is with him. Director Powers —It's still primarily an economic consideration of course that has caused some delay. In addition to that Dr. Ha and his project managers are still negotiating with Walgreen's over some site and building design issues. I am sure it is related to financing. Page 18 of 20 Chairman Wilson — I got a really snazzy hand out from Fresh & Easy and I really appreciate that except all it tells us is that the entire world is getting their benefit of their expansion other than us. I do know that there are a lot buildings that have been built from as far as Coachella Valley all the way to Rialto and some of those buildings have been occupied and I do know that was part of their overall plan and I am painfully we're aware of the economic condition and how it affects expansion in any business environment. I am hoping that we within this next year will be able to*see some kind of game plan from Dr. Ha that he can advise us how we are going to be moving towards being the premier project that would show us coming out of the economic slump and I would applaud any action towards that. The next item of course, almost as equally as painful, is the status of the Jacobsen project. Director Powers —It's the same as last time I was able to give you an update and that is that the developer is trying to match revenues with cost of development. Chairman Wilson — Is there any possibility that we can utilize outside help in re-phasing the project so at least the anchor Stater Bros. market might be able to go forward and be able to maybe save some of the other infrastructure improvements so that it is financial feasible so we may be able to move forward with project. Director Powers—And we have done that with them. Chairman Wilson—Do we have a time line available one of these days? Commissioner Comstock — One question in relation to Jacobsen project. I know that on the lower end of Michigan there is an abandoned house there that has broken windows and different things and I know this because my son has been in that house and I have told him he's not suppose to be in there. His friend used to live there but the lower half along Michigan where the trailer courts used to be,and where that house is, it is an unsightly mess and I was wondering if we can get that house knocked down and kind of clean up the lower end there and make it look like someone cares. Director Powers —Yes Commissioner we have been working on that. Barrie Owens is working that. Chairman Wilson — We have a house in our hillside area that has some prominent lighting at night that is not a happy situation as far as I am concerned and I have asked Director Powers to look into that file and how the approval went primarily because I think there is a problem with the shielding of the lighting as well as,the way the landscaping is incongruent with the surrounding hillsides so we are really kind of digging into that to determine what is going on with that. It sticks out like a sore thumb and I am not happy the way that worked out. The other item is I've had a discussion with Rich Shields regarding the traffic on Barton Road and Preston at peak hours and I've gained the understanding that there are approximately 10 cars stacked on each side of Preston, on each side of Barton, I'm sorry on Preston, say around the 8 o'clock hour or what we call the witching hour in the morning and unfortunately it has caused a Page 19 of 20 r' situation where you get a lot of fool hardy individuals trying to turn around the traffic and pass on the right hand side and I know my wife has reported she has had three instances in the last two weeks where she just about got clobbered in the intersection. To Mr. Shield's credit he introduced last week an item in relation to the financial incentives that are suppose to be taking place from the federal level to go in and replace some of the loops that are in Preston and take care of some electrical malfunction that might take place there as well as repave a portion in that area and try to restage some of the timing of those lights. I am aware though that part of the problem is surrounded by the fact that there is some kind of a congruency that is taking place with the SANBAG over all regional circulation and to that I would say that we don't care if it's going to cause a problem where we are endangering some of our citizens. I say we ditch that concept and head towards a more intelligent implementation. If necessary we get the traffic consultant involved to try to solve that problem once the funds are made available so that we can solve that entire difficulty. I do not want to see anybody endangered there, least of all my wife and I think its worth investigated and getting solved. I know there is more than person that is not happy with it. I just bring that up so that we know there is ongoing problem and an ongoing solution being figured. I also know that there was some discussion at a recent Council Meeting in relation to the traffic circulation surrounding the Senior Center and more prominently the ancient problem with the elementary school. I am hoping there is some good progress made soon in relation to that and that the school district is going to step up and solve their problem because it's been an ancient problem and as our Mayor identified it's been at least 25 years that the school has had that problem and has not solved it. If necessary I think I would recommend to the City Council that we enact a legal-proceeding with the school district if they fail to step up and solve �r the problem because it's very dangerous and my granddaughter goes to that school and I would rather not see anybody get injured. That's everything on my plate. Any other comments from the Commissioners if not then we will close Information from the Commissioners. CHAIR WILSON ADJOURNED THE SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEEING TO THE NEXT MEETING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5,2009. Respectfully Submitted, Approved By, Jolde P6wers Doug Wilson, Chairman Community and Economic Planning Commission Development Director Page 20 of 20