Loading...
11/16/1995GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING NOVEM 3ER 16,1995 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 November 16, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. by Vice -Chairperson, Doug Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Vice -Chairperson Matthew Addington, Commissioner LeeAnn Garcia, Commissioner Moira Huss, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, Community Development Director John W. Donlevy, Jr., Assistant City Manager Virgil Barham, Director, Building/Safety and Public Works Maria Muett, Senior Planner Hally Cappiello, Planning Intern Pat Peterson, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Jimmy W. Sims, Chairperson 6:30 P.M. CONVENED PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION * Information/comments from staff • Overview of code enforcement procedures within the City, by Hally Cappiello. ► Number of cases since 1992--2,170 total complaints received. 564 cases cleared per year average. ► Division of duties (areas of responsibility for each department: Community Development, Community Services and Building/Safety & Public Works) Complaints are all received and logged initially in the Community Development Department then referred to other City departments as appropriate. Building/Safety Dept. handles building code violations. Community Development Dept. handles zoning and home occupation violations. Community Services Dept. handles private property maintenance and public right of way issues. ► Examples of types of code enforcement cases and where do they originate? - Critical issues dealing with Health and Safety issues can be staff initiated. - Majority of cases are initiated by the public. - Citizen Patrol, Planning Commissioners, City Council members, and City staff are also sources of code enforcement complaints. ► Step-by-step case progression from initiation of complaint to resolution: Community Development Department - Site inspection to observe and document subject of complaint - Courtesy contact to resident by phone or letter - Nuisance abatement hearing, if needed - The Code Enforcement Manual in draft form is available for review by Commission members including all procedures and forms in detail. Community Services Department - Uses many styles and modes of communication with citizens to resolve wide variety of property maintenance complaints, according to circumstances. Try to minimize paperwork and formal procedures. Building/Safety and Public Works - Complaint jurisdiction is defined by the Uniform Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code and National Electrical Code adopted by the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. - Citizen complaints generally initiate the code enforcement process via Action Request form. - Site inspection to observe subject of complaint from public right of way - Check to see if permit has been taken - Personal contact to resident/homeowner - Issue Notice of Violation with deadline to contact City Inspector - Issue Stop Work Notice if warranted A presentation was made by Anita Booker with the Center for Dispute Resolution at the San Bernardino County Superior/Municipal Trial Courts. She explained they provide mediation services in addition to small claim advisory services. The service is free of charge. They work to provide a forum where citizens can meet to discuss and resolve their disputes. Approximately 500 case have been resolved each year with an 80% settlement rate. Consensus of Planning Commission members to have the issue of Code Enforcement continued to a future workshop to allow time for questions and answers. Commissioners were requested to put code enforcement questions/concerns in writing to the Community Development Director for future discussion at the next meeting. 01 2 7:05 P.M. ADJOURNED PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION 7:05 P.M. CONVENED SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING * Call to Order * Pledge of Allegiance by Commissioner Moira Huss * Roll Call * Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by the Chairperson. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written request to be agendized to the Community Development Director. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None. ITEM#1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 2,1995 MOTION PCM-95-48 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 2,1995 Motion by Commissioner Van Gelder to approve Planning Commission meeting minutes of November 2, 1995. Motion seconded by Commissioner Munson. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-48 Motion carried. 5-0-1-1. Commissioner Addington abstained and Chairperson Sims absent. ITEM #2 CUP-95-04/SA-95-12 DAVID AND CAROL RAYA AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW OF A MODULAR UNIT TO SERVE AS A "GRANNY FLAT"/SECOND FAMILY UNIT IN THE R1-7.2 ZONE DISTRICT Staff report presented by Maria Muett, Senior Planner. Government Code requires local governments to allow second family units and contain provisions of development of such units C 3 in all residential areas. A CUP is allowed for second family units by State Code and is required by local ordinance.. Site and Architecture Review is required for modular units in the R1-7.2 residential district. Staff analysis determined the project to be in accordance with State and local code requirements for second units. A Site and Architecture Review is required for manufactured housing units to evaluate compatibility, appropriateness with permanent uses on the site and surrounding areas. Applicants have demolished an old existing garage to allow for delivery and set up of a modular unit to serve as a second family unit/"granny flat" for applicant's elderly parents in poor health. Per code a new two -car garage (minimum 20' X 20) is to be constructed. Minor deviation is necessary to allow modular unit to be placed closer to the rear property line to accommodate a turn around area for fire vehicles. Commissioners were given a State handout on "Second Units" from the Department of Housing and Community Development addressing commonly -asked questions. Staff summarized the site plan, including the proposed landscaping. Applicants have requested waiver of the Capital Improvement Fees by the City and School District per Government Code based on financial hardship. The code section cited by Ms. Raya in her request for fee waiver has been referred to the City Attorney for his review and legal interpretation regarding applicant's eligibility for fee waiver. Community Development Director explained the City is required by State law to allow Second Family Units. Regarding the issue of gravel vs. paved driveway, only the Planning Commission can approve the gravel in the plan. Commissioner Van Gelder asked the amount of the Capital Improvement Fee and school impact fee. Maria Muett responded that the School fee is $1.72/square foot, or $1,981.44. Capital Improvement Fees are $413 + 303 +450 = $1,066. Commissioner Garcia asked about the dust factor regarding the gravel drive. Director explained the gravel will be compacted three times to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. Maria said the main concern is to reduce the dust and provide stability to support heavy fire trucks, but no specific materials are determined at this time. 7:30 P.M. OPENED FOR PUBLIC HEARING Kenneth Meier 12537 Michigan Grand Terrace, CA 92313 Said he has lived next to the Rayas for 30 years and they have been excellent neighbors. He endorsed the project. 4 David Walker Walker Construction Said he has been contacted to do the foundation work for the modular home. Carol Raya 12547 Michigan Grand Terrace, CA 92313 Introduced herself as the applicant. Commissioner Munson asked applicant about the air conditioning/heating for the modular unit. Applicant responded that it is central heating/cooling located on the ground. Vice -Chairperson Wilson asked Mr. Walker if he will be installing the gravel driveway. Mr. Walker said he will be responsible for the foundation only at this point. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Commissioner asked Director what would happen if applicants decided at some later date to sell the modular unit. Director explained they cannot be precluded from selling at later time but if that should happen it is the Assistant City Attorney's opinion they must return the property to the original condition. Discussion took place regarding applicant's request for Capital Improvement Fee waiver and staff recommendation to defer decision to the City Attorney. Some commissioners were concerned in establishing a non -desired precedent regarding fee waiving. Director explained that the condition could be re -worded to provide flexibility to staff to allow waiver if City Attorney determines the applicant has this legal right (due to dependent parents and financial hardship). Otherwise, case will need to return to Planning Commission at a later date. MOTION PCM-95-49 CUP-95-03/SA-95-12 Motion by Commissioner Van Gelder to approve CUP-95-03 and SA-95-12 with changes to conditions suggested by staff, with the exception of waiver of Capital Improvement Fees. Motion seconded by Commissioner Huss. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-49 CUP-95-03/SA-95/12 Motion carried. 6-0-1-0. Chairperson Sims absent. MOTION PCM-95-50 CUP-95-03/SA-95-12 Motion by Vice -Chairperson Wilson to amend condition #2 to provide flexibility to staff, to read "only those fees applicable at the time permits are issued shall be paid." Motion seconded by Commissioner Huss. MOTION VOTE PCM-50 CUP-95-03/SA-95-12 Motion carried. 4-2-1-0. Chairperson Sims absent. Commissioners Garcia and Van Gelder voted no. ITEM #3 CUP-95-03/SA-95-08/E-95-11 PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SYSTEMS APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 60' MONOPOLE FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. 12012 LaCROSSE, GRAND TERRACE (These are verbatim minutes per request of Director on this item.) Staff report summary by Maria Muett, Senior Planner, to explain the difference between this project and a cellular communication station. This project is state-of-the-art in that it can transmit data and video images as well as voice. It is referred to by the acronym PCS (personal communication services). Community Development Director Materassi suggested the Planning Commission may wish to recommend to the City Council that a study be made to analyze the City for future such projects and guidelines be developed. fi At this time Marianne Boring and Darrell Daugherty, contractor representatives for Pacific Bell Mobile Services addressed the Planning Commission with their presentation to explain the proposed project. Mr. Daugherty told the Planning Commission that PCS uses a different radio spectrum than any other type of communications (from 1850 megahertz to 2200 megahertz). It is currently being used in the United Kingdom, France and Japan. He said PCS will require almost twice as many locations because this range in the radio spectrum only carries about half as far as cellular signals. One positive aspect is that since there will be numerous pole locations they can/will be lower. He passed to Planning Commissioners a picture of a typical cellular pole (24-36" in diameter and 100 ` tall). The typical building, housing the cellular equipment is approx. 12' x 30', and located adjacent to the pole. Then, for comparison, he passed around a photo of the 60' light standard pole proposed to be used for this project. This pole is only 18" in diameter. Two radio equipment cabinets will be necessary, each approximately 51" x 63" x 28" deep. These cabinets are made by a firm which makes utility vaults for Pacific Bell, they are forest green in color and are bullet-proof. The radio equipment in the cabinets will need to be serviced only two times per month. All wiring will be undergrounded to the utility cabinets which are equipped with silent alarms. Mr. Daugherty explained General Order 159, developed in 1990, by the PUC which gives utilities an appeal process with preemption powers upon denial of a project by local municipalities. He said although Pacific Bell Mobile Services is a public utility they are not yet subject to General Order 159. Further, he explained cellular is an analog system designed for two-way or mobile communications. PCS is a digital system created for data as well as voice communications. Commissioner Garcia asked who monitors the silent alarm system for the equipment cabinets. Mr. Daugherty said it goes to the Pacific Bell Mobile Services switchboard which monitors 24 hours a day. The Sheriff s Department is notified and a technician responds to the equipment cabinet to investigate. Commissioner Van Gelder asked about the additional pole sites Mr. Daugherty referred to earlier. She wanted to know where they may be located in the future. Mr. Daugherty explained he could not say at this point where they may be located. It is a very ambitious plan to create the skeleton of this communication system with the idea of adding sufficient stations to have the system operational by late 1996 or early 1997. Spacing of the poles is critical because handoffs are made from station to station. Additional poles would typically be placed between existing poles and be shorter in height. The purpose of additional poles is for increased user capacity as the market develops. Each pole can accommodate 47 simultaneous calls. There are currently plans in the City and County of Riverside to locate monopoles in the public right of way using the standard concrete light pole and attach arching street lights on them to blend in with the regular street lights. Commissioner Van Gelder asked what mitigation measures would be taken should the Federal Government issue findings that the electro-magnetic fields are hazardous. Mr. Daugherty said the Federal Government has adopted a guideline established by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) which have established standards for radio emissions. Pacific Bell will monitor the ANSI �� 7 standards and should there be a finding that radio waves are health hazards Pacific Bell would take swift action. He went further to say that the proposed 60' pole actually is several thousand times below the safety emissions threshold. Commissioner Van Gelder asked about the purpose of the trailer currently on the property. Staff stated it has no relation to the proposed project. Commissioner Van Gelder suggested the conditions be amended to read "shall not be inhabited by the business, or applicant or anyone else." Commissioner Van Gelder asked if Mr. Daugherty can foresee in the future other companies seeking approval on projects which would have poles conceivable compatible with the subject project. He said they will not be able to share equipment with cellular companies because they use totally different frequencies. The other PCS company, Cox Communication, will be using different technology so integration of equipment and antennae is not anticipated. Vice -Chairperson Wilson asked applicant why the pole needs to be 60'. Mr. Daugherty said they had explored the idea with staff of locating the pole in different locations in Grand Terrace. It would need to be higher if located elsewhere to obtain the same efficiency because of topography. The pole must be of sufficient height to be able to make the handover to the next PCS site. Commissioner Wilson then asked if the pole could be accommodated on Blue Mountain. Mr. Daugherty said the sites need to be approximately the same height. A site on the mountain would be too high and make it impossible to reuse the radio frequencies. 8:50 P.M. OPENED/CLOSED TO PUBLIC DISCUSSION. No speakers. Commissioner Addington asked if staff received any public comment after proper notice was given. Maria Muett responded that no public comment was received. MOTION PCM-95-51 CUP-95-03/SA-95-08/E-95-11 Motion by Commissioner Munson to approve CUP-95-03/SA-95-11/E-95-11. Motion seconded by Commissioner Addington. A short discussion followed: Commissioner Van Gelder said she would like to change condition #11 to read, ..."shall not be used for habitation or business by the applicant, owner or anyone else." Commissioner Addington said the location and ownership of the trailer is beyond the control of the applicant, and not applicable. Director said condition #11 was for the property owner who has agreed to the condition. Harold Clark, property owner, present said the storage container is used to hold the tools, supplies and equipment necessary to maintain the building. It is painted the same color as the existing building and will not be used for habitation. It will eventually be removed from the site. 8 MOTION VOTE PCM-95-51 Motion carried. 5-1-1-0. Vice -Chairman Wilson voted no and Chairman Sims absent. Commissioner Van Gelder commented she is in favor of having guidelines developed for the subject of communications system transmission poles/towers. There was consensus of the Planning Commission to pursue such guidelines and be forwarded to City Council. ITEM #4 SA-95-09 J. BARNEY KARGER AN APPLICATION FOR A SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW TO ADD TWO OVERHEAD DECKS AS PART OF CARPORT/GARAGE CONVERSION FOR APARTMENTS. 22441/22451 DeSOTO STREET, GRAND TERRACE MOTION PCM-95-52 SA-95-09 Motion by Commissioner Van Gelder to continue public hearing per request of applicant, to December 7, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia. MOTION VOTE PCM-95-52 Motion carried. 6-0-1-0. Chairperson Sims absent. Commissioner Addington asked if a Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for December 21. Director explained an agenda item has tentatively been scheduled for that date. Commissioners Garcia and Munson advised they will not be available on December 21, 1995. New schedule of one meeting per month on the first Thursday will likely start in January, 1996 only. E 9:05 P.M. ADJOURNED SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD ON DECEMBER 7,1995 AT 7:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, PatA a Materassi Community Development Director PM:pp 11-30-95 c:/office/wpwin/wpdocs/planning/minutes/11-16-95.min Approved by, Doug Wilson Vice -Chairperson, Planning Commission 10