Loading...
06/01/1995GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION NIINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JUNE 1. 1995 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California on June 1, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Jimmy Sims. PRESENT: Jimmy Sims, Chairman Doug Wilson, Vice -Chairman Matthew Addington, Commissioner LeeAnn Garcia, Commissioner Moire Huss, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, Community Development Director Maria C. Muett, Associate Planner Pat Peterson, Community Development Secretary PLEDGE: Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner 6:45 P.M. CONVENED PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION Director addressed Commission regarding scheduled Planning Commission meetings and agenda items for their review on those dates. Commissioner Addington and Chairman Sims will be unable to attend the July 6, meeting. Commissioner Garcia will not be able to attend July 20. Commissioner Addington requested detailed minutes of the July 6 meeting. Director concurred there will be verbatim minutes. Director advised Commission there has been an inquiry from the landlord of the Stater Bros. shopping center regarding the possibility of sub -dividing the old Sprouse -Ritz store. She discussed the list of "preliminary" projects included in their packet of information. Commissioner Van Gelder inquired about the Halstead code enforcement action. Director explained we have just again begun enforcement activities as we have discovered Halstead is once again booking weddings. A Notice to Appear was issued to Halstead to appear in court on June 16. This is the first code enforcement action we will be sending to the environmental court. The court Commissioner has the power to impose fines and award administrative costs. Director reminded Commissioners that they need to speak loudly and directly into their microphones as the secretary is having trouble hearing during transcription. 1 7:00 p.m. ADJOURNED PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 7:00 p.m. CONVENED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING/SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD Director advised Commission members she has secured a Community Shuttle from Omni -Trans for the Grand Terrace Days Parade on June 10, and invited each to ride the shuttle in the parade with City Council and General Plan Task Force members. Commissioner Wilson volunteered to ride. Commissioner Garcia may also be able to participate. Commissioner Garcia volunteered to attend the Economic Development Conference in Long Beach, August 16 to 18. Director asked the attendee to make a presentation to the General Plan Task Force as they will be developing an Socio-Economic Element for the General Plan update. The Community Development Department budget has been approved for this next fiscal year. Director reviewed status of projects she is working on for the Commission. Commissioner Huss inquired about the status of Mr. Steele's code enforcement case. Director explained we have received a letter of commitment from him to comply with the conditions imposed by the Commission. In addition, he has submitted plans to improve the house across the street from his residence. Director is requiring a strict environmental review of this project. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None. ITEM #1 PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 20, 1995 MOTION PCM-95-14 PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING MINUTES - AP RI L 2 0-, 1995 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the a/20/9,5 minutes. Commissioner Addington seconded. Commissioner Addington asked for clarification of Paragraph 1, Page 6, due to vagueness. Director agreed it will be clarified. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-14 Motion carries. 6-0-0-1. Chairman Sims abstained. 2 ITEM #4 DU-95-01 An Application for Determination of Use to temporarily allow existing non- conforming monument sign in the Barton Road Specific Plan. (Per BRSP Section III.F.h) Commissioner Munson suggested this item be advanced on the agenda as interested parties were in the audience. There was no objection by other Commissioners. Associate Planner, Maria Muett, presented a staff report to Commissioners suggesting three proposals. Commissioner Van Gelder questioned whether applicant would be considered in compliance during the next 2 years. Director confirmed he will be in compliance and as such may apply for a freeway sign. Commissioner Addington asked if the City has the right to go onto private property and remove the sign using the $3,000 bond if applicant failed to comply by the end of two years. Director confirmed the City can remove the sign or bring it up to code. Director explained that the current placement of the monument sign will be affected by the Congestion Management Plan as Michigan becomes busier and moves from a level "C" to level "D" rating. Director clarified the recommended choices Commission can choose from: 1. Leave as is for 3 yrs. 2. Leave size and non -opaqueness of background as is but lower sign height and move out of right of way. Director cannot grant deviation on non -opaqueness and placement on the public right of way. She can authorize deviations on height and square footage. Applicant, Ali Yasin, addressed the Commission. He stated he is the sole owner of the ARCO station and has owned it for two years. He owns the property and has a franchise with ARCO. The station belonged to three owners before him. He stated the sign belongs to ARCO. The station is open 24 hours. He wants to put up a freeway sign to increase business. He is ready to move the monument sign 32" to be on his property. He is also ready to lower the sign. Applicant stated that since the sign is owned by ARCO this is creating a problem with regard to making the sign smaller. Signage is important to him to increase the fuel he sells, enable him to keep his ARCO franchise and bring business to the City. He stated he has no choice in the size of sign ARCO makes or provides to the franchise owners. Chairman asked Director if ARCO doesn't have to conform to our regulations. Director confirmed they do need to comply. He owner is responsible, not ARCO. Commissioner Van Gelder asked applicant if his monument sign had county approval. He explained again that he has had the station only 2 years and the 3 MOTION PCM-95-15 DU-95-01 signage was done before he bought the station. Director explained to Commission the decisions of the Planning Commission are attached to the property. The approval of the monument sign was done at the county level but over the years it has been changed and increased in size without any permit. This means the sign is illegal. Commissioner Sims stated that it appears Mr. Yasin inherited the problem and did not create it. Director stated that it is very difficult to prove that because every time a site inspection is done something is different. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the monument sign permit was issued before incorporation. Director said we found a 1981 permit for a small sign for the previous Mobile station. The sign permit was actually issued by the City in 1981. There was a discussion between Commissioner Garcia, Director and applicant comparing the Texaco remodel and subsequent signage to that of ARCO. Director stated Mr. Yasin could do signage such as that of Texaco because it is all legal but he needs to go through the process. Applicant asked for details of the $3,000 deposit. Chairman Sims explained it is like a security deposit, a guaranty for conformance. Applicant asked if he may post a surety bond. Director explained he can post a CD, cash or surety bond at the pleasure of Applicant but within 30 days of this hearing. Commissioner Addington stated he was opposed to supporting Proposal #1 at this time because the monument sign is in the public right of way and also because several years ago the sign requirements were amended to specifically make it easier for businesses to post effective signage. A discussion ensued regarding signs being "grandfathered" three years ago. Director indicated signs were "grandfathered" at that time if they were built with permits, and added that at any time the signs are changed or altered they lose the non -conformity status. Commissioner Van Gelder said she felt three years was an exorbitant length of time. She would go along with two years however. Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to reduce the Determination of Use Permit to two years in lieu of three years as stated in the staff report proposals #1 and #2. Second by Commissioner Huss. 4 MOTION VOTE PCM-95-15 MOTION PCM-95-16 Motion carries. 6-0-0-1. Commissioner Wilson abstained. Commissioner Garcia said she felt is was awkward to state that applicant is in temporary conformance for a period of two years. Director explained this would give him two years to apply for his freeway sign and fix the monument sign to bring in into conformance. Commissioner Addington made a motion to approve Proposal #2 with the temporary approval for no more than two years. Second by Commissioner Munson. Commissioner Wilson suggested amending Proposal #2 so Applicant can post a cash CD or a surety bond. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-16 Motion carries. 6-1-0-0. Chairman Sims voted no. Director asked Chairman Sims to recap what was approved for the benefit of applicant. "Proposal #2 was approved. It was amended to temporary approval for no more than two years and it also was changed to allow for either a bond surety or the CD deposit, whichever is easier for you. " 8:40 P.M. COMMISSION RECESSED FOR 5 MINUTE BREAK. 8:45 P.M. COMMISSION RECONVENED FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ITEM #2 Z-95-02/E-95-04 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT AND ASSOCIATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TO EXPEDITE REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR STRUCTURES DAMAGED BY FIRE, EARTHQUAKE AND OTHER NATURAL DISASTERS; CLARIFYING TRIGGERING CONFORMANCE THRESHOLDS; FORMALIZED POLICY ON SCREENING MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT FROM PUBLIC VIEW OF NEW RESIDENCES E Associate Planner, Maria Muett, presented the staff report to Commissioners. She explained the City has received numerous inquiries from appraisers, homeowners, and mortgage companies asking what would happen in case of fire or natural disaster. They want to know if they would be able to rebuild and what percentage is the triggering factor. Residential, commercial and industrial district were all examined. We currently have no rebuild procedure. The code currently addresses minor alterations initiated by the applicant, not necessarily created by natural disasters. Chairman Sims asked for clarification of non -conforming structure in industrial zone damaged by fire. The resident simply wanted to rebuild exactly as structure was prior to the fire or natural disaster. He questioned what "exactly" means. Director explained square footage needs to be the same; materials may be slightly different but structure must be brought up to current codes. 9:05 p.m. Chairman Sims opened hearing for public comment. No public comment. 9:05 p.m. Public hearing closed. MOTION PCM-95-17 Z-95-02/E-95-04 Motion by Commissioner Addington to approve. Second by Commissioner Huss. Commissioner Munson suggested that screening of mechanical equipment (i.e. air conditioning) should be handled on an individual case by case basis. Director explained the policy of screening mechanical equipment is currently only in the BRSP. Every other place it is part of the conditions of approval. This current proposal would actually initiate code requirements. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-17 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Wilson left the meeting at 8:45 p.m. ITEM #3 Z-95-03 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT TO CHANGE MUNICIPAL CODE ORDINANCE CHAPTER 5.06 HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS -STANDARD CONDITIONS This item is on agenda for discussion and guidance by Commission. 6 Maria Muett, Associate Planner, presented staff report. Commissioner Addington suggested a clarification on Page 4 of Attachment A, the term "employees" be defined for the person applying for the permit, or substitute "independent sub- contractor" or "sub -consultant". Commissioner Addington suggested the following language: "In the case of indirect or sub -contractors or sub -consultants which are not members of the households, et cetera, and then give a definition of an "employee" so that it's in writing to that person who pulls that permit." "Definition of "employee" is the IRS's definition and they have seven criteria that defines an employee versus a sub -consultant. " Director asked the Commission if they are eliminating condition #1. It states that employees are to be members of the household. Chairman Sims re -stated what Commissioner Addington said as follows: "Define employees as members of the resident family. What Commissioner Addington is saying is that the next sentence in italics is that 'in the case of indirect or sub -contractors or sub -consultants who are not members of the household but do not work at the home occupation a commitment letter of agreement shall be submitted.' That is more appropriate because there is no such thing as a sub -contracting employee. " Commissioner Garcia suggested "the only persons who may work for the HOP business are r members of the resident household." This was accepted as re -wording of condition #1. `�. Commissioner Addington suggested that on top of Page 5, the self -monitoring activity report be stricken. He also suggested striking the next line on Page 5, "Accept revocation of the HOP without appeal provided the citizen complaints are submitted and not easily cleared. " He felt this conflicts with 5.06.080 on Page 6, which says they can file an appeal. This was accepted by Commission and Director. Director suggested making HOP's temporary and subject to renewal annually in the situation where there are sub -contractors and sub -consultants. Commissioner Addington suggested tying the HOP into the business license renewal process. This was accepted provided HOP renewal is only required once, to test performance of HOP. 7 Chairman Sims asked what the Commercial Vehicle Policy is. Director said it will be brought to the Commission for approval as it has just been developed. 9:30 P.M. ADJOURNED PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON JUNE 15, 1995. Respectfully submitted, Patrizia Materassi Community Development Director 06-29-95:pp c:\wp5l\planning\minutes\06-01-95.m Approved by, Jimmy W. ims, Chairman Planning Commission 8