Loading...
02/21/1991GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 21, 1991 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 February 21, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. by Vice -Chairman Dan Buchanan. PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Ron Wright, Commissioner David R. Sawyer, Community Development Director Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman PLEDGE: Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners. Information from Planning Commissioners to staff. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None. r- r ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 7, 1991 MOTION PCM-91-28 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 7, 1991 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-28 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the February 7, 1991 minutes. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Vice -Chairman Buchanan abstained. ITEM #2 TTM-90-06 POTOMAC WEST 22310 AND 22324 BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 15149 (ONE LOT SUBDIVISION) FOR A SHOPPING CENTER IN THE BARTON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN The Community Development Director presented the staff report. 7:05 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. HANK JACOBS POTOMAC WEST 17525 VENTURA BOULEVARD ENCINO Mr. Jacobs stated that they are just complying with the rules and had no further comments. 7:06 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan brought this item back to the commission. 2 MOTION PCM-91-29 TTM-90-06 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-29 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve TTM-90-06 subject to staff recommendations. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Chairman Hawkinson absent. ITEM #3 TTM-89-04 RICHARD K. CHURCHWELL 23081 GRAND TERRACE ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 4.9+ ACRES IN THE R1-10 DISTRICT INTO 9 RESIDENTIAL LOTS OF 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Commissioner Wright asked if there was any provision for Arliss eventually coming through. The Community Development Director stated that Arliss will be terminated where it is now, as it is not designed to be continued through. Commissioner Wright asked about the possibility of a turnaround. The Community Development Director stated that the engineer has not required a turnaround at this point, and it would require dedication from the adjacent properties. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that in their packet, there is an application for environmental review, and asked if they acted on this at the last hearing. He stated that it was not listed on the agenda. The Community Development Director stated that they do need to act on it, but unfortunately can not as it is not on the agenda, which also means they can not approve the map tonight. He said that this was originally brought 3 together with the zoning change with one Negative Declaration. He said that the commission recommended approval for the zone change and the Negative Declaration for the zone change, which has been on hold to go the Council until these maps are approved. He said that since then, this item has been listed just as the map and not with the environmental document as it went with the zone change. He felt that since the map has changed, he recommends that since it was not on the agenda, it would be better to approve it with the Negative Declaration. He said it would be on the March 7, 1991 meeting and recommended a continuance. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked about the public hearing process and whether or not they could open it tonight for the map. The Community Development Director stated this was fine, as the public hearing is required for the map and not for the environmental portion. Commissioner Wright asked if these maps are submitted to the law enforcement agency for input. The Community Development Director stated that law enforcement is on the standard reviewing agency list, but it depends on the project as to whether or not it is sent to them or not. Mr. Wright asked if they would have some input with regard to Lot 8 with the long driveway and the view and plants back to that particular pad. The Community Development Director stated that if it was a commercial or multi -family project, they would definitely send it to them, but for residential tract homes they normally don't respond on this type of issue.. 7:22 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. RICHARD CHURCHWELL 23081 GRAND TERRACE ROAD G.T. Mr. Churchwell had no comments. Commissioner Hargrave asked if it was still the intent to come off of Grand Terrace Road with driveways onto Lots 6 and 7. Mr. Churchwell stated this was correct, and there would be two separate 2 driveways. He stated that they come in at an angle to each other. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if the area designated as the 20' drainage and utility easement on the north side of Lot 1 was considered part of Lot 1 subject to an easement, to which Mr. Churchwell responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if all things were in order for the Lot C street to continue through. Mr. Churchwell stated this was correct, as he talked to both property owners on each side of the proposed extension, and both have agreed to making a dedication to the City. Commissioner Sims asked if he had talked to Metropolitan about putting the street on top of their easement. Mr. Churchwell said they will allow a street, but they do have some restrictions as to depth and how close they can come to the pipeline. Commissioner Hargrave asked what mechanism would be used to control traffic at the intersection. Mr. Churchwell said he hadn't talked to the City Engineer about this, however he assumed they would require stop signs. The Community Development Director stated that they will have to take the traffic counts. Commissioner Hargrave asked, with regard to curb and guttering, what is the extent of what has to be done by Mr. Churchwell. The Community Development Director stated that on Grand Terrace Road, it would just be along the portion that is adjacent to the map itself. He said they will require that the Lot C road which will be continued up and meet Grand Terrace Road will be fully improved. Vice -Chairman Buchanan invited any comments from the audience. ROMAYNE CHINNOCK 22935 ARLISS DRIVE G.T. Mr. Chinnock stated that his property is immediately to the West of the map. He said that when they met 12-4-90, testimony was given by Doug Shackelton 5 that in order to resolve questions among the neighbors, there would be a neighborhood meeting conducted. He said he inquired twice as to when this meeting would be conducted and it never took place. He had a number of concerns regarding this project. He said that to the rear of Lots 1, 2 and 3, there are 16 Eucalyptus trees, many 50-60' tall. He said these trees seem to be on his and Mr. Churchwell's property line. He said he would be very sad to see these trees destroyed as they are nesting areas for hawks. He said that he was concerned with the elevation of Lot 1, stating that this map shows a great disruption of the natural flow of the terrain in that area. He said that his pool is at 1149 sq. ft. and the pad elevation is at 1160 sq. ft. and is concerned about the drainage. He expressed concern about the easement, which is not level and will cause drainage to flow down onto the end of Arliss Drive. He expressed concern about the drainage of the entire map, stating that Lots 1, 2 and 3 will flow onto Lot C and will flow down from Grand Terrace Road, and he sees no provision at the bottom of the hill, which would be the extension of Arliss Drive. He expressed a desire to hear from the neighbors themselves regarding their agreement to dedicate for Lot C. He said that to the best of his calculations, the extension of Lot C to Grand Terrace Road will follow the Santa Ana Water District Aqueduct. He asked how venting will take place. The Community Development Director stated that some of these issues are engineering and grading issues. He said that with regard to the trees, the property has been surveyed and the base of the trees are identified on the map, and if they would like to see the trees saved, now is an appropriate time to make those comments. He said that regarding the elevation of Lot 1, they can take his comments into consideration. He stated that the drainage issue along the north side of Lot 1 connecting with Arliss Drive is something the City Engineer has considered and his conditions address this. He said that regarding the dedications for Lot C, the applicant has indicated that those people are willing to do that, and they are not in a point now to require seeing any written communication. He said that regarding placement of the road over the water supply easement, this has been done throughout town. He said that Condition 12 of the Engineering recommendations is to obtain approvals and permits from Department of Water Resources for any facilities to be constructed with DWR right-of-way. ROBERT LEE 22937 GRAND TERRACE ROAD G.T. Dr. Lee stated that he owns the property to the west and, at this time, they are planning to dedicate the land and have given verbal consent. He said that as long as the changes go through the way they are at this time, they see no Z reason not to dedicate. AARON MARTINEZ 22950 ARLISS DRIVE G.T. Mr. Martinez' main concern was the drainage, especially after rainfall. He said that he asked the City Engineer this morning, and he said it was just a tentative tract map and this would be answered later on. He was concerned as to who would maintain the lots and how would foot traffic be controlled along Arliss Drive. The Community Development Director stated that the City Engineer will look at the drainage, and they do consider normal rainfall. He said maintenance of the lots will be the responsibility of the property owner, and until they are sold individually, Mr. Churchwell will be responsible. He said that regarding foot traffic, this is private property, and it would be up to the property owners to monitor this. ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11831 PRESTON G.T. Ms. Kennedy was concerned about the Eucalyptus trees and doesn't see them on the map. She expressed concern as to where the utility easements are going to run to the individual homes. She said she would rather not have power lines across the back of her lot. She objects to standard overhead street lighting as it would affect the rural quality of the area. Mr. Churchwell stated that he would like to maintain the Eucalyptus trees is possible. He said the lots are very deep and as a result, it shouldn't interfere with the building on that pad in any way. He said that the remainder of the items are engineering questions that will be addressed when they get to that step. He stated that it would be his responsibility to maintain the erosion control on the lots as well as weeds, etc. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if his intention is to underground the utilities on the project site. Mr. Churchwell agreed to this. The Community Development Director stated that this is a requirement of the City. 7 Mr. Churchwell stated that with regard to street lighting, they would get involved during the engineering plan and will work with the City to meet their requirements. The Community Development Director stated that there are standard street lights that the City requires, and as long as the lights are on a public street, then the City or Edison will eventually be responsible for the maintenance of those lights. He said that they can make a recommendation to the City Council for an alternative light if desired. Commissioner Hargrave stated that the glow of the light is something that could be considered, but the omament is a City Ordinance, and that would have to be a Council decision. He asked how the public could become involved with regard to the grading. The Community Development Director stated that they could call the City Engineer for status, but there are no further public notices until final recordation. Mr. Churchwell provided his office number (825-8255) and home number (529-2675). BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN 22111 LADERA STREET G.T. Ms. Pfennighausen asked if a developer came in with a unique development that standard lighting would not enhance, would that developer not be able to put in some other kind of decorative lighting. The Community Development Director stated that the Engineer states what the lighting requirements are for the City, and they might want to contact that department to see if there are alternatives. ROMAYNE CHINNOCK 22935 ARLISS DRIVE G.T. Mr. Chinnock stated that at the northwest comer of Lot 1 there is a footnote which states "Line drainage swell at toe of slope", which would go along the line of Eucalyptus trees. He asked what this would be and what kind of damage this would do to the Eucalyptus trees in its construction. He stated that in order for the pads to be built the way they are, a good deal of dirt will have to be taken out, compacted and put back in, and felt this would be �-Q damaging to the Eucalyptus trees. He requested a condition to require that these trees not be damaged. He stated that he thought they would have a neighborhood meeting. He expressed concern that questions are not being answered as there is not a two-way communication process. The Community Development Director felt there had been quite a bit of communication with staff, both Engineering and Planning Departments. He stated that staff can't force meetings between individual property owners, but he felt most of the concerns have been addressed. Mr. Chinnock stated that they don't get a lot of information and this is why they have the group that they do here tonight. He feels that once it is approved, the surrounding property owners will have no more input. ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11831 PRESTON G.T. Ms. Kennedy stated that she has spent quite a bit of time on the phone with the City Engineer, who has always been polite, but she has never received an answer she could understand. She feels there is a communication breakdown. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked the commissioners and staff for input regarding closing or continuing the public hearing. Commissioner Hargrave stated that he would like to continue it as a matter of courtesy to the citizens. The Community Development Director stated this would be staff s recommendation also. Vice -Chairman Buchanan suspended the public hearing for discussion purposes and left it open to the 3-7-91 Planning Commission Meeting. He brought the item back to the commission. Commissioner Hargrave asked if there was a wall requirement around each development, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative. Commissioner Wright asked staff to check with the City Engineer on street light alternatives. Commissioner Hargrave requested the City Engineer to be at the 3-7-91 Planning Commission Meeting. Z MOTION PCM-91-30 TTM-89-04 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-30 Vice -Chairman Buchanan commented that part of the communication problem is that some of the questions being asked don't have answers at this point, and this is not unusual. He said that a requirement is that adequate drainage facilities are provided, and the applicant will have to satisfy this before finalization. He stated he would like to see staff draft some proposed additional conditions for preservation of the Eucalyptus trees, undergrounding utilities and the street light situation. He said that drainage has a standard condition. Commissioner Sims stated that the drainage issue will be addressed as the City has to make sure that no damage occurs by this project to existing properties. Vice -Chairman Buchanan was concerned that Conditions 2 and 9 of the recommended resolution were redundant. The Community Development Director clarified the two conditions and stated they could reword it to make better sense. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that with regard to #8, submittal of an erosion plan for approval, staff may want to consider including submittal to Riverside -Corona Resource District and staff for approval. Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to continue TTM-89-04 and public hearing to the March 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting to also include Environmental Review of TTM-89-04. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Commissioner Sims stated he would abstain from this vote as he works for this firm. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. RECESS - 8:30 P.M. TO 8:40 P.M. 10 ITEM #4 1'rM-90-04; E-90-07 TONY PETTA NORTHWEST CORNER OF VICTORIA AND BARTON G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO SUBDIVIDE A 3.17 ACRE, Rl- 10 PARCEL INTO 10 RESIDENTIAL LOTS OF 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM; AN APPLICATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF TTM-90-04 The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Commissioner Sims stated that he would be abstaining from the vote on this item. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that at the end of Victoria at Preston, the visibility is obscured and asked if there was something that could be done about it. The Community Development Director stated that this property has been subject to nuisance abatement proceedings in the last few months and has been cleaned up drastically in the last two weeks. He stated that staff would follow up and make sure the sight distance is appropriate. 8:54 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. TONY PETTA 11875 ETON DRIVE G.T. Mr. Petta stated that he and his engineer made every attempt to meet the ordinance and code requirements. BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN 22111 LADERA STREET G.T. Ms. Pfennighausen stated that she was neither opposed nor supported the project. She felt it would enhance the City, but her concern was from the Preston Street/Victoria Street aspect. She said she was under the understanding that Victoria Street was going to be improved to its full width so that it would flow. The Community Development Director stated that the Engineer's requirements at this point will be the standard curb and gutter requirement, 18' south of centerline for Victoria Street and 10' north of centerline. He said that when the other properties develop in any way, they will be required to add the additional 8' of paving and construct curb and gutter and dedicate the additional 12' for the parkway. ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11831 PRESTON G.T. Ms. Kennedy stated that she has a property line in common with Lot 1, and the south property line was incorrectly located on the map. She felt none of her concerns regarding the true, existing contours of the land, the proposed grading, the lot elevation and the resulting banks on the west side have been addressed. She expressed concern that the pad elevations on this map create or allow 10' embankments along the west property line, and assuming that the contour lines are correct, elevations of Lots 1- 5 will be raised as much as 11' above their current elevations. She said that Lot 1 has a proposed increase of elevation from 4-6'; Lot 2: 8-10'; Lot 3: 11'; Lot 4: 9'; and Lot 5: 3-51 . She said it appeared that some of these lots will require banks with slopes greater than a 2:1 ratio with these elevation changes. She pointed out that Lots 1-4 will be raised 2-3' above their current, highest elevations. She said there appears to be a 6' difference in elevation along the north side of Lot 1 with no bank represented to account for a 2' difference between this property and the 4' bank shown on the adjoining property tract map to the north. She said that how these properties are graded affects decisions for uses of her rear yard and on where to locate their home on their property. She said that the proposed increases in elevations for Lots 1-5 along with 35' high structures constructed 10'-15' apart will affect the amount of natural morning light available to properties adjacent to the west and north of this proposed tract. She said that drainage for the proposed tract currently flows not only to the north, but it would seem from the existing contours as drawn on the map, it drains to the west to private property along Preston Street and along Victoria Street. She said the proposed changes in elevation will increase the drainage to the west and erosion caused by surface and underground drainage from these banks could undermine and jeopardize the integrity of the existing 10' to 4' bank and planned retaining wall, as required by the City on her property. She stated that her comments regarding the street lighting and utilities apply to this project. Mr. Petta stated that he didn't understand the problem. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that the neighbors are looking at the contour 12 lines and comparing it with the planned pad elevations and are noting that it appears the pad elevations are going to be significantly higher than the existing topography. Mr. Petta stated that his lot is probably no different than Ms. Kennedy's lot, as her lot has high banks with respect to neighbors. He asked Mr. Addington, an engineer, to advise him. Mr. Petta stated that from Mr. Addington's point of view, his pad is approximately the same elevation as Ms. Kennedy's pad. ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11831 PRESTON STREET G.T. Ms. Kennedy stated that the proposed pad elevation of Lot 1 is to be 4' higher than her current lot, which is now level with Mr. Petta's lot. She said that he is speaking of a comer which is 38.73' long, which her property borders. She said that their property is level for about 6' of this. She said that her bank is 10' tall, however, in her discussion with the City, it has been indicated that she will be required to put in a retaining wall along that bank as it exceeds the 2:1 requirement. TONY PETTA 11875 ETON DRIVE G.T. Mr. Petta assured the commissioners and Ms. Kennedy that they will meet whatever requirement the City Engineer has to protect the neighboring properties. 9:15 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan brought the item back to the commission. Commissioner Van Gelder asked how Victoria Street would be striped. The Community Development Director stated that this would be up to the Engineering Department. Commissioner Hargrave asked about the street width of Victoria Street. The Community Development Director stated that there would be 18' of pavement on the south side and 10' on the north side, and normally you would have 18' on each side. He said the minimum safety requirement of the Engineer would be 28' for two-way traffic. 13 BILL ADDINGTON 12055 WESTWOOD LANE G.T. Mr. Addington stated that when you have property being built on one side of the street, it is customary to get the 18' to centerline and additional 10' so that you have two lanes and parking. He said they would be giving up parking next to the curb on the north side of the street, 6' of paving and 2' of gutter. Commissioner Hargrave asked, with regard to the slopes on the west side, if there are problems after the initial grading, if perhaps individual Site and Architectural Review will be a time to address the drainage. The Community Development Director stated that Condition 8 of the City Engineer's report states that the applicant shall provide a drainage study. Commissioner Munson stated that the Negative Declaration states that the parcel will be divided into 11 residential lots. The Community Development Director stated that they will make this correction, as this was the Negative Declaration that was filed and dated previously. He said that they have actually mitigated some of the concerns in the Negative Declaration by reducing down to 10. Commissioner Wright stated that between the two tracts, there should be some importation of dirt, and if there is considerable truck activity in the area, special attention should be given to that. He expressed interest in alternative lighting standards. MOTION PCM-91-31 TTM-90-04, E-90-07 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-31 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to add to Condition 9 that the City of Grand Terrace is notified at the same time and provided with plans as is the Riverside -Corona Resource Conversation District. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. 14 MOTION PCM-91-32 TTM-90-04, E-90-07 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-32 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to add to Condition 2 that the City Engineer is asked to consider alternative street lighting with a focus toward a more rural atmosphere if possible. The Community Development Director stated they are actually changing the City Engineer's recommended Condition 4. Commissioner Hargrave concurred. Vice -Chairman Buchanan second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked for guidance regarding preservation, where feasible, of mature and healthy trees. The Community Development Director asked for specific trees. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that at the junction of the northeast corner of Lots 8 and 9 there is a large Pepper Tree. MOTION PCM-91-33 TTM-90-04, E-90-07 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-33 Vice -Chairman Buchanan made a motion to add as Condition 12 that the large Pepper Tree at the northeast comer of proposed Lot 8 be preserved if feasible. Commissioner Hargrave second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. Commissioner Hargrave asked where the condition for the difference in 8' of 15 curbing be put in. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if it would be possible to require the improvement to the north of centerline to the extent that the property has been dedicated to the City. The Community Development Director stated that it could be a condition, but they could add, 'Be it further resolved" that the Planning Commission feels it appropriate that Victoria Street be widened to its fullest extent north of centerline all the way from Preston Street to the development, and would recommend that Council consider this as a requirement. MOTION PCM-91-34 TTM-90-04, E-90-07 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-34 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to add as Condition 13 to extend the dedication to its fullest amount whether or not dedication is presently there or not. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Commissioner Wright asked who foots the bill if they go north. The Community Development Director stated that they can't require the developer to do it. He said it is up to the Council to make it a condition or not, and they will have to consider who will be responsible for doing it, and legally he doesn't feel they have the basis to require him to do more than the 10', which the City Engineer said would be safe. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. Commissioner Wright felt that if alternative lighting is used, it would seem logical that the same form of lighting be applied in both projects. MOTION PCM-91-35 TTM-90-04, E-90-07 Commissioner Munson made a motion to adopt the attached resolution recommending that City Council approve TTM-90-04 and its associated 16 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-35 Negative Declaration, E-90-07 subject to the conditions contained herein and added. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Chairman Hawkinson absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. ITEM #5 TPM-87-03R1 WILLIS AND OPAL COOK 11917 ROSEDALE G.T. AN APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE A 3.23 ACRE LOT IN THE R1-20 DISTRICT INTO TWO PARCELS MOTION PCM-91-36 TPM-87-03R1 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-36 Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that this item has been requested to be continued. The Community Development Director stated that staff recommends that this item be continued to the March 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. Vice -Chairman Buchanan made a motion to continue TPM-87-03R1 to the March 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Chairman Hawkinson absent. 17 ITEM #6 CUP-91-01 HERITAGE QUALITY DRY CLEANERS/POTOMAC WEST PROPERTIES, LTD. 22310 BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRY CLEANING BUSINESS IN THE BARTON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Commissioner Van Gelder asked how many feet there would be from the dry cleaning portion to the closest residence. The Community Development Director stated it would at least 100' to the actual unit itself. 9:46 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING Vice -Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. FRANK WIENER 23808 MULHOLLAND HIGHWAY CALABASAS Mr. Wiener said he read all the conditions and will meet and comply with them. Vice -Chairman Buchanan expressed a concern about what kind of sound is generated. Mr. Wiener stated that there is virtually no sound. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked about odors or steam releases. Mr. Wiener stated that odors are not allowed to escape from the machines, and with regard to steam, there is a thirty second expenditure of steam once a day. Commissioner Hargrave asked what "full service dry cleaning" means. Mr. Wiener said they will be cleaning and pressing clothing on the premises and washing and ironing shirts on the premises. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if they will be using vehicles to bring in dry Mo cleaning to the establishment. Mr. Wiener stated they may possibly have home service, but they have not definitely decided on this. Commissioner Van Gelder asked how many full service cleaning establishments are allowed in San Bernardino County, as she said she was told it was three, as it is very difficult to get these permits. Mr. Wiener stated that he had no idea how many were allowed, but permits are not difficult to get, as the chemicals used for cleaning are approved. HANK JACOBS 17525 VENTURA BOULEVARD ENCINO Mr. Jacobs said that full service only means they are doing the dry cleaning on their site. He guessed there to be over 10,000 establishments in San Bernardino County. Commissioner Van Gelder expressed concern about a possible spill or fire occurring so close to the residential area. Mr. Wiener stated that as far as flash point is concern, there isn't any, and flammable limits in air is labeled as none. He said it does have some requirements with regard to the toxicity, but there is no other product available for dry cleaning clothing. Mr. Jacobs stated that if they approve this application, one of the conditions is that Mr. Wiener obtain a permit for hazardous material handling. Commissioner Sims asked if the individual operating the equipment will be qualified and certified. Mr. Wiener stated that there are OSHA requirements that the owner and operator of the facility have meetings with the employees to verse them in the chemicals and handling. He said that Worker's Compensation comes in and makes sure everyone knows how to handle the equipment. The Community Development Director stated that they did notify Air Quality Management District but didn't receive any comments, however, they will not get license to operate until they meet any conditions they may place upon them. 19 9:55 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION PCM-91-37 CUP-91-01 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-37 Vice -Chairman Buchanan brought the item back to the Commission. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that with regard to # 1 of the findings, whether or not the proposed use would be detrimental to the general health and safety, she stated that if it is working probably it won't, but was concerned if an accident occurred. Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve CUP-91-01 and adopt the attached resolution subject to the conditions contained therein. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 5-1-1-0. Commissioner Van Gelder voted no. Chairman Hawkinson absent. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:03 P.M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 10:03 P.M. ITEM #7 SA-91-01 BRUCE W. HALSTEAD, M.D. 23000 GRAND TERRACE ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A NEW STORAGE FACILITY TO BE LOCATED IN THE R1-20 DISTRICT MOTION PCM-91-38 SA-91-01 Vice -Chairman Buchanan made a motion to continue SA-91-01 to the March 7, 1991 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Sims second. 20 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-38 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Chairman Hawkinson absent. ITEM #8 SA-91-02 FRANK A. MORALES/DONALD G. ALBISO 22660 CARDINAL STREET G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A TWO-STORY ROOM ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN THE R1-7.2 DISTRICT The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Commissioner Hargrave asked for clarification regarding the sprinkler. The Community Development Director stated that this morning staff received a FAX from the water department indicating how much water would be available, and apparently there is not enough water pressure to provide the appropriate fire flow to reach the second story in the case of a fire, and because of that, the fire department sent a memo indicating a change in their conditions with a requirement that the second story portion of the house be fire sprinklered on the inside. He said that as a result of this information, the fire department will accept one of the following alternatives: 1) Correction of the deficiency by improving the flow characteristics of that portion of the water system; 2) Add area separation walls as defined in Chapter 5 of the Uniform Building Code to the addition to reduce the area of calculation to meet fire flow; or 3) Install an automatic residential fire sprinkler system to the addition only. Commissioner Munson asked if their were any comments from surrounding neighbors, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative. 10:10 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING 21 Vice -Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. FRANK MORALES 31 BROWNING STREET RIVERSIDE Mr. Morales stated that he did provide one hour walls in his construction drawings for the interior, which he felt would meet Item 2, and if so, he didn't feel there would be any problem. He said that sprinklers would have a monetary consideration. He asked about the 2 story properties to the east, and what happens with that fire flow. The Community Development Director stated that they may be on a different water line. Commissioner Hargrave asked if there was a plan to provide access from the 2nd story addition directly down into the garage. Mr. Morales said that from the existing dining area, there is a pass -through from the dining area into the existing garage. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if the roofing on the existing roof was composition shingle and if the proposed roofing and stucco matches the existing house. Mr. Morales stated that it is composition shingle and the match is fairly close. 10:16 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION PCM-91-39 SA-91-02 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-39 Vice -Chairman Buchanan brought the item back to the Site and Architectural Review Board. Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve SA-91-02 with Planning Department recommendations as stated and addition on Item 3 of the February 21, 1991 Fire Department memorandum. Commissioner Sims second. 22 Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Chairman Hawkinson absent. ITEM #9 SA-91-03 ROBERT R. ZENDEJAS 22247 EMERALD STREET G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A PATIO ROOF AND ROOM ADDITION TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IN THE R1-7.2 DISTRICT The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if it was acceptable that the patio roof was 5' from the property line, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked that staff make sure that this is a patio roof and not a balcony, to which the Community Development Director agreed. 10:20 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING 10:20 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION PCM-91-40 SA-91-03 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-40 Vice -Chairman Buchanan brought the item back to the Site and Architectural Review Board. Commissioner Sims made a motion to approve SA-91-03 as conditioned. Commissioner Hargrave second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Chairman Hawkinson absent. 23 SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 10:22 P.M. NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD MARCH 7, 1991. Respectfully submitted, David R. Sawyer Community Develop ent Director 03-07-91 24 Approved by, I Dan Buchanan Vice -Chairman, Planning Commission