Loading...
11/07/1991GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 7. 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 November 7, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Dan Buchanan. PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Chairman Jerry Hawkinson, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Ron Wright, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director Maria C. Muett, Associate Planner Maggie Alford, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Stanley Hargrave, Vice -Chairman PLEDGE: Jim Sims, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. The Planning Director stated that in the last fifteen days, there were eleven inquiries on development: Address 1. McClarren 2. Barton Road 3. Barton/Palm (Old Fruit Stand) DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL Developer Description 1 R-2 duplexes devel. potential empty lot behind retirement hotel R3 Representative Frank Dreschler Kai Wong & Assoc. office Realty Rep. BRSP AP Subarea C 4. 5. 6. 7. Main Avenue Charles Chiang TTM 22872 Sale of hillside prop. (SP approved for Mike Raven/Marian Anderson) RH Zone Commerce Way Michigan Preston/Barton Vic Peloquin Byron Matteson (owner - 1 lot) Tony Petta (owner) 8. La Crosse Gerry Adams (next to In&Out Paint & Body Shop) 9. Barton Road Sue Gay/Realty (s.w. of L.A. Wain Scott) 10. Pico Avenue 11. Grand Terrace Rd. Ben Reynolds business park (lot consolidation) C2 Zone Master Plan 1 Lot Consolid. Devel. Poten. BRSP GC Subarea Administrative/ Professional Devel. Poten. automotive center C2 Zone boxing arena gym-redevel. MR Zone Eve Lubling Realty Rep Robert Luna -owns 9 acres-RH/R1-20 Barney Karger subdivision R2 2-4 parcels For Sale Commissioner Munson stated that he does not want staff to make any kind of commitment to the owner of Parcel Two (parcel behind the Terrace Retirement Hotel). The Planning Director stated that she has a call in to the City Attorney regarding this situation. Commissioner Van Gelder was concerned about the lack of tenants for the new centers. The Planning Director stated that Stan Curatolo's center is the only one that doesn't have any tenants. She said that the other day, staff met with Jerry Dowd (La Mancha Development) and almost convinced him to develop the GTI Market property in order to change the image of the intersection. Commissioner Hawkinson stated that there will be traffic problems once that building is occupied again due to the driveway access on 2 Mt. Vernon. He said that an alternative is to have the building razed. Commissioner Hawkinson said that he does not like the idea of the automotive center at the La Crosse property, considering the fine building L.A. Wainscott put up on Barton Road. CONSENT CALENDAR The Planning Director said that according to the City Attorney, public hearing items can not be part of the Consent Calendar, and Consent Calendar items are those that do not need discussion. She stated that she drafted the following preliminary proposal for the consideration of the Commission: Overhead Decks Patio Covers Room Additions Current Proposed All approved by PC (over 10' in height) All above 10' approved by P.C. Overhead decks which meet design guidelines to be approved by staff All to be approved by staff Over 500 sq. ft. and 2 stories approved All to be approved by staff by P.C. Access. Struc. Over 10' R1-7.2 All but structures Over 20' R1-10/20 w/80% or more of the Approved by P.C. square footage of the main residence Note: All of the above type projects to be noticed to adjacent property owners. Projects will require Public Hearings in case applicant does not accept staff conditions of approval. Commissioner Hawkinson stated that satellite dishes could be added. Commissioner Munson asked about lot splits or consolidations. The Planning Director stated that she would not have the authority to approve these at staff level. Commissioner Sims stated that he was not particularly in favor of this idea. He said that there have been a few items that have been controversial. Chairman Buchanan suggested the Commissioners review this suggestion and discuss it further at the next workshop. The Associate Planner stated that she and Commissioner Van Gelder attended the APA Conference in Sacramento and do have some material and two tapes available for the Commission's review. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she attended a seminar on art in the city, and as part of the seminar, Chuck Myers, Senior Planner and Public Information Officer from the City of Gilroy took his vacation time to serve as a supervisor in one segment of placing the Christo Umbrella in the desert area and provided a sample of the two fabrics that were used. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Commissioner Wright said that on the #1 lane, eastbound, on Barton Road, there was a cut in the street in front of Security Pacific Bank, and it did not appear that there was any shoring in the trench, and there was a man in the trench at least up to his neck. The City Engineer said that 5' is where shoring is required, and he thought the trench was at 48", but he could check. He said that in such a situation, they can call OSHA to come out and inspect, as they would have the authority. Commissioner Van Gelder asked about the trees in the front of the Advocate School. The Associate Planner stated that they have upgraded some of the landscaping, but the dead tree is still there, so they will have to make a follow-up contact. The Planning Director stated that a formal letter may be needed. ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 17, 1991 MOTION PCM-91-153 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 17, 1991 4 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-153 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the October 17, 1991 minutes. Commissioner Munson second. Motion carries. 5-0-1-1. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Commissioner Sims abstained. ITEM #2 CUP-91-05 HOOD COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 21496 MAIN STREET G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR INSTALLATION OF A MODULAR OFFICE IN THE M2 ZONE The Planning Director presented the staff report. Chairman Buchanan clarified that Condition 3, Riverside Highland Water Company, should be Attachment J. He asked for clarification that the applicant is not being required to obtain a will -serve letter from Riverside Highland Water Company. The Planning Director stated this is correct, but once the applicant gains permanent status, they will need to get the water from Riverside Highland Water, who will provide water under the conditions mentioned in the attachment. Chairman Buchanan asked how long the City is willing to live with the temporary water situation. The Planning Director said the applicant has to install sprinklers, so she felt the temporary situation will work. Chairman Buchanan asked if it is staffs recommendation that the Commission requires as a condition of this Conditional Use Permit a will -serve letter from the City of Riverside that they will provide water supply to this project for at least two years. The Planning Director stated that it could be, but she would like to ask the applicant, as he dealt with the City of Riverside, and he may have some 5 specific information to offer. Chairman Buchanan said that he has no problem with this as long as the temporary water service coincides with the temporary use. The Planning Director stated that the applicant needed to get the letter from the Riverside Highland Water Company in order to obtain the letter from the City of Riverside. She said the applicant may already have this. She said they can reword the condition to require that a will -serve letter is provided by the City of Riverside for the duration of the temporary permit. Chairman Buchanan clarified that, with regard to Condition #4, the temporary permit will expire in December, and the applicant will have to cease use of the modular structure. He asked if the structure is already in place. The Planning Director stated that the applicant had authorization, picked up the permit and is installing it. Chairman Buchanan asked why staff is recommending the application of the zone change as a condition of approval. He said that if they don't apply for the zone change, when two years is up, they will take out their structure. He asked if a revocation hearing would be held if they did not apply for the zone change. The Planning Director said this condition grew from an issue regarding modular structures in an industrial area. She said there are some structures in the industrial area that have been approved and are not completely consistent with the code. She said that in the past, it was the interpretation of the Planning Director that modular structures could be interpreted as an architectural element. However, after speaking to the City Attorney, staff found they would need to change the code if they want to allow modular structures on a permanent basis in industrial areas. She said that with this condition, they would be allowing the applicant to stay longer, as others in the area, and at the same time, resolving a code issue. Chairman Buchanan said that if they are going to make a zone change application a requirement of the Conditional Use Permit, he would prefer to see it an immediate requirement, that before they have the Conditional Use Permit, or before December, they have the zone change application submitted. Commissioner Sims stated that one of the conditions requires parking lot striping onto gravel. 0 The Planning Director stated that right now, they have tape on the gravel. Commissioner Sims was concerned about the appearance of the site with regard to landscaping, as the Commission was very careful with past projects in the area. The Planning Director stated that she has reviewed the applications and reports from past projects in the area, and a lot of those uses were permanent. She stated that this use is temporary until the applicant comes for a permanent proposal. She said that they intend to maintain the modular structure and build the future building on the south side of the property. Commissioner Sims was concerned about the lighting, due to this project being in a remote area. He also suggested a parking area of a more permanent nature. Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. BRUCE CASH EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT HOOD COMMUNICATIONS 21496 MAIN STREET G.T. Mr. Cash presented photographs of the site to the Commission. He stated that Hood Communications moved to Grand Terrace from Whittier last February, and that the company has 258 employees in nine states. He said that they came to Grand Terrace because this is a service -oriented City, and the City's desire was to attract companies who are non -polluters and have clean businesses. He said that the City has been very helpful, and the City Manager and Planning Director have been very professional. He said that the mayor visited the site and had nothing but positive things to say about the type of operation they have. He expressed appreciation to the City staff for all of the help given. He said that this temporary use permit is based on a strategic plan, as the construction industry is very unpredictable. He said they do not have the capital to move to Phase 2, and therefore ask the City to consider the Phase 1 status so that they can continue to conduct business, enhance growth, provide jobs for their employees and raise the capital necessary to meet the long range objectives of two years. He said there is a great opportunity for Hood Communications to work with the Planning Commission to alleviate what has been a problem on that site, which they purchased from Able Industries. He stated that there is a "hodge-podge" of trailers on the site, which do not enhance good business practices, and they have been working collectively with the City to eliminate this problem which isn't even properly permitted. He stated that Hood Communications is committed to investing in the community, and the moment he joined the company six weeks ago, they immediately joined the Chamber of Commerce. He said that they own a land -locked piece of property, and are trying to make the four acre site usable and a positive business for the City of Grand Terrace. He said that there is tremendous cost associated with the Phase 1 activities underway. He said that they are moving the trailers off of the site, as they don't belong to them and their lease is up. Mr. Cash said that the City of Riverside Water Committee met with there on October 23, 1991, and they raised all of the concerns that have been raised tonight. He said that they placed three conditions on Hood Communications in order to provide service for a two year period. He said that the first two conditions have been complied with, and the third condition, requiring them to provide a performance bond or a contractual agreement between themselves and Riverside Highland Water Company, should be worked out within the next several days. Regarding the parking area, he said that they are a construction company with over 150 pieces of large equipment on a four acre site, and they fully intend to provide paving on the frontage of the modular office out to the existing paved road area, but they do not intend to pave the outlying areas where they have heavy construction equipment. He stated that they are in a landlocked environment, as trains are going by constantly on one side as well as the Edison substructure yard providing power. He said that on the other side, they see the 215 and 91 freeway and the Gage Canal. Chairman Buchanan asked if the applicant would feel comfortable with Condition #3 reading that, "Compliance with all conditions and provision of a will -serve letter from the City of Riverside for a minimum period of two years", to which Mr. Cash agreed. Chairman Buchanan asked about exterior lighting plans. Mr. Cash stated that the site is well illuminated, as they have a terrific investment in vehicles and equipment. He said they just installed three additional lights to improve a particular area on the site. Chairman Buchanan asked the applicant to address the comments he had made on the zone change application requirement. Mr. Cash said that it is to their advantage to apply for this, and they would be happy to apply for this permanent zone change status in the immediate future. He felt one year was reasonable as it allowed them to address the more immediate needs of the business, but they will come in within the next two months with the zone change application as it is in their best interest. Commissioner Wright asked if scrap was brought back to the site. Mr. Cash said usually not, but there may be some small amounts of residual scrap, and what they have provided on the site is a typical low -bed waste trailer that is picked up twice weekly. He said that they will see a very organized yard with new rolls of fiber-optic cable, as well as other structures waiting to be installed, but they will not find scrap materials lying around. 7:56 P.M. OPENED/CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING MOTION PCM-91-154 CUP-91-05 Chairman Buchanan brought this item back to the Commission. Commissioner Sims stated that the other projects in the area involved a concern regarding the hours of operation and noise levels and asked if there was any concern of this type for this project. The Planning Director stated that there are no neighbors and it is industrial all around the site, so there is no impact. Chairman Buchanan stated that he recognizes the isolation of this project and has no problem with the modular structure as proposed. He felt the conditions of approval should be cleaned up. Chairman Buchanan made a motion the Condition #3 be reworded to require submission of a will -serve letter in compliance with all requirements of the will -serve letter from the City of Riverside for a minimum duration of two years. Commissioner Sims second for discussion. Commissioner Sims asked if this was in addition to the statement that Riverside Highland Water also provide a will -serve letter. Chairman Buchanan said it is to replace this. Commissioner Sims stated that the City of Riverside is already requiring that Riverside Highland Water provide a will -serve letter. Chairman Buchanan stated that as it is currently written, a condition of the Conditional Use Permit is compliance with all the conditions set out in the E MOTION VOTE PCM-91-154 MOTION PCM-91-155 CUP-91-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-155 MOTION PCM-91-156 CUP-91-05 Riverside Highland Water Company's letter, and this includes items that are not being required as conditions of approval. He said that he is comfortable with the way that he proposed it because they know that the City of Riverside is only going to issue their will -serve letter once they have the will -serve letter from Riverside Highland Water Company. He said that his motion only added the two year duration to the City Engineer's condition. Chairman Buchanan amended his motion to read, "provide a will -serve letter from the City of Riverside with a minimum duration of two years, or in the alternative, comply with all conditions as recommended by Riverside Highland Water Company in their memorandum dated October 31, 1991, attached as Attachment F. Commissioner Sims concurred. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Chairman Buchanan made a motion that Condition #7 be amended to require submission of sign plans and lighting plans for review and approval by the Planning Director. Commissioner Sims second. Commissioner Sims asked if the type of signs they are talking about are monument signs or signs that would have to come back before this body if over a certain size. The Planning Director stated that they are signs that can be approved at staff level. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. 10 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-156 MOTION PCM-91-157 CUP-91-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-157 MOTION PCM-91-158 CUP-91-05 Chairman Buchanan made a motion to amend Condition #4 to require submittal of the application for a zone change to alter the M2 District allowing the installation of permanent modular uses by February 7, 1992, which is a three month period. Commissioner Sims second. The Associate Planner asked if this was a weekday. Chairman Buchanan stated that he would amend this to within 90 days of this date. Commissioner Sims concurred. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Commissioner Sims asked for clarification on submission of a grading plan. The City Engineer stated that this could be handled with the inspection. Chairman Buchanan made a motion to add as a condition that the proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the design as approved by the Planning Commission on November 7, 1991, attached as Exhibit 1. All plans shall be consistent in terms of property lines and other measurements. Minor changes or clarifications may be made by the Planning Department. Commissioner Sims second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Chairman Buchanan made a motion that the Planning Commission approve CUP-91-05 pursuant to the findings and recommended conditions of approval reflected on Attachment A and as modified tonight. Commissioner Sims 11 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-158 second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:11 P.M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 8:25 P.M. ITEM #3 SA-91-20 DENNIS AND ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11831 PRESTON STREET G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE R1-10 DISTRICT The Associate Planner presented the staff report. The Planning Director stated that the applicant has agreed with Option B, Issue 1, from page 4 of the report, which states, 'Require a dedication for the ultimate right-of-way width of 66', and installation of improvements for existing right-of-way of 60' provided that an agreement is signed". She said that the agreement is, "In case the General Plan update of 1993 confirms Preston Street as a collector street, the applicant will need to replace the improvements. However, if the General Plan update revises Preston to be a local street, the City will vacate the land, and the applicant has no more responsibility". She said that currently, the applicant is the only vacant property in the area, and everyone else has improved either to the 60' right- of-way or has not dedicated yet, so this was one of the conditions that the City Attorney and the applicant felt comfortable with. Chairman Buchanan said that the City Engineer, on #2, states, "dedicate to provide for 30 feet of right-of-way on the easterly side of Preston Street along the frontage of subject parcel'. The City Engineer said that to meet the requirements of the General Plan Circulation Element, the additional dedication that would be required is 28 feet, for a total width of 66' with 44' of paving. He said that a collector street 12 in the current General Plan is 66'. He said the current right-of-way along that frontage is 40' and the paved section itself is 28'. Commissioner Sims asked if the City Engineer normally requires an applicant to dedicate from center line. The City Engineer said that this street is a little different as they have the 40' on the westerly side, so it is offset. He said at 66' total, they have 40' plus 28' instead of 30'. He stated that, with respect to the improvements, the Planning Director has covered the issue as to what the applicant wants to do, and he has no problem either way. He said that most of the improvement were based on a typical residential street, 36' curb to curb. Chairman Buchanan asked about the possible drainage problem being covered. The City Engineer said that they did not have the conditions of approval before the applicant started doing the grading plan with respect to the right- of-way itself. He said that the area toward the northerly property line is not well enough defined to see what the topography does and to see if they can't drain it. He said that without irrigation of the proposed landscaping, the runoff would be decreased at the adjacent property than historically existed. Chairman Buchanan called up the applicant. ELIZABETH KENNEDY 11821 HOLLY STREET G.T. Ms. Kennedy stated that they bought there home in 1975 and immediately looked for land to buy and purchased the lot on Preston in 1978. She said they have been planning this house for two years trying to address and protect their neighbors privacy and other concerns. She stated that they looked long and hard for a level lot on which to build a single family home to meet their needs with a yard she could use and enjoy in her wheelchair. She said it is with great sadness that they watch the property gradually lose its vegetation as the drought continues, stating that it is now an eyesore, and they look forward to restoring it. She stated that want to answer everyone's concerns regarding drainage and blending into the neighborhood. She asked for clarification as to when she would be required to relocate any improvements. She stated that she did not want to be the only property street frontage widened to 44', while other properties remain at 40' and the property to the south remains unimproved. She expressed her willingness to choose Option B and relocate any improvement when the City widens all of Preston Street 13 from Victoria to Arliss Drive. She said that the City Engineer stated 68' of dedication and the staff report said 66' of dedication and asked for clarification. She said they would like to improve to the existing curb and gutter due to the possibility of Preston Street not being widened to 66'. She said they would like to help provide a uniform curb line on Preston Street and create a better planned appearance. She asked when Preston Street would be widened. She said she would like to defer the installation of a street light and sidewalk until such time that other street lights and sidewalks are installed. She felt they voted down the formation of a street lighting district to preserve the rural nature of this side of Barton Road. She said that if street lighting is required, she would need further clarification as to what type of lighting she can put up. She said that she would like to defer the sidewalk and would be willing to sign an agreement to say that she would put in sidewalks and street lighting when put in on this side of Preston Street. She stated that, with regard to Issue #3, she has no problem with saving the pine tree, but she is very concerned with the safety of it if a big wind were to come along. She said they would be cutting into its root system when they widen the street, which causes concern for safety. She said that with regard to Issue #4, she had no problem with designing a pleasing frontage appearance with staffs help. She said there are now four trees, including two crepe myrtles lower on the slope, a large pine tree to replace the existing tree if removed and a black leaf plum near the garage area. She had no problem with Issue #5. Chairman Buchanan stated that there is a reference in Condition #8 to working drawings, but he did not see any specific requirement that the applicant submit a detailed landscaping or irrigation plan that addresses the incorporation of what is listed in the staff report as Issue #4. The Planning Director stated that the landscaping suggestions to the applicant were not considered conditions, however, they should require a landscaping plan. Chairman Buchanan stated that the applicant is willing to comply with Condition #12, regarding the existing pine tree to be protected and maintained as feasible, with the feasibility including a concern for safety due to cutting into the root system, so Issue #3 is dealt with. He said that Issue #4, landscaping improvements, deals with staffs suggestions to the applicant, and as long as the Commission adds a condition for a detailed landscaping and irrigation plan, this can be handled at staff level. He said that with regard to Issue #5, consistency of site grading and landscaping plan, the applicant has indicated they have no problem with this, and this is incorporated in Conditions #8 and 14. 14 The Planning Director stated that landscaping and irrigation is included in Condition #8. Chairman Buchanan agreed that they do not need to add a condition for this. He asked the applicant if she was satisfied with Issue #6, which deals with the fencing, which is incorporated into Condition #13, requiring a 4' cedar wooden fence on the south property line, a 6' wooden fence on the north property line and deferred determination of the treatment of the rear fence. Ms. Kennedy stated that she would prefer that on the south side of the property, that the 4' fence end at either the southwest corner of the kitchen or the southwest corner of the garage. She felt that if they add shrubbery of varying height down to Preston rather than a 4' fence, they will still preserve the privacy of the front yards of the people's homes to the south, and at the same time provide a more pleasing appearance to people driving on Preston as well as eliminating any hazards caused by visual blockage of driveway access to Preston from her home and her neighbor's home to the south as well as any visual blockage of people travelling along Preston Street. Chairman Buchanan asked if the applicant was satisfied with the 6' wooden fence along the north property line as well as the deferred treatment of the rear fence, to which the applicant responded in the affirmative. The Associate Planner said that staff has no problem with this. Chairman Buchanan asked if the intent was for the fencing to go all the way to the street on the north property line. The Planning Director said that if the applicant would prefer to stop the fencing short of the street, that would be fine with staff. She said that the applicant doesn't have the dedication or improvements yet, so it is difficult to analyze the front portion before there are any working drawings. Chairman Buchanan stated that it seems they need to deal with the dedication and street improvements, including sidewalk and street lighting. Ms. Kennedy stated that the City Engineer has an overlay which should show what would happen to the frontage along Preston Street. The City Engineer stated that what he has locates the existing improvements and indicates the existing right-of-way between Arliss and Barton Road on Preston. He said that based on what he sees, everything that has been constructed and dedicated within that particular section has been done to a standard of residential street, 36' curb to curb. He said that it appears that 15 40 or 50% of the east side frontage of Preston Street has been developed within a 60' right-of-way. He said that his concern is if they have a General Plan that indicates it should be 66' with 44' separation. He said that he has no problem vacating that portion as long as they get the dedication and if the General Plan ever changes where it is recognized as a residential street instead of a collector. He said that with respect to the improvements, he would like to see the improvements installed at 36' curb separation. He felt that staff doesn't have the luxury of delaying street lighting and sidewalk, but the Planning Commission can recommend this to the City Council if desired. He said he has no problem as far as the sidewalk is concerned, but he felt the street light should be looked at as they may have to do some street cutting after the fact. He explained that the reason for the 28' right-of-way is that, although it gives them 2 additional feet of right-of-way over and above what the General Plan requires, but on the westerly side, it is done in accordance with the current standards where the parkways are, 12' wide instead of 10' wide. Chairman Buchanan stated that the City Engineer's recommendation, then, is to dedicate to provide for a 28' right-of-way on the easterly side of Preston, and that he is satisfied as long as the dedication is made if they require improvements consistent with the existing improvements based on the 36' of paving. He stated that he understood the Commission does not have the authority to grant a deferral agreement, but that the City Engineer doesn't have a problem with a recommendation for a deferral. Ms. Kennedy stated that she would like to reassure everyone that she wants to develop this property in accordance with everyone's concerns. 9:09 P.M. OPENED PUBLIC HEARING ROMAYNE CHINNOCK 22935 ARLISS DRIVE G.T. Mr. Chinnock complimented staff for the preparation of this report and complimented the applicant for her desire to be a good neighbor, and for this reason, he is speaking in favor of the approval of this request. He stated that he has a few concerns that have been addressed, and he believed these could be adequately mitigated. He said that one concern in the matter of privacy, and the applicant has agreed to a 6' fence on the northerly property line, which is next to his property. He said there is no single family dwelling on the map to indicate his home, but he believed this was left off inadvertently. He stated that his north -south property line is drawn incorrectly on the map, as it is 8' to the west of the power pole as indicated on the map. He said that 16 the property owner to the west and his property are similar in size in the east - west length of the property. He said he is concerned that there is no drainage indication next to his property line on the map, as the property does fall off sharply to the north and somewhat to the east. He felt there should be some type of a swell constructed to drain to Preston Street so that he will not collect the runoff and drainage. He said even drip irrigation adds moisture to the soil and in the event of a heavy rain, it will cause runoff. He said that his house is close to that property line, and it is approximately 25' below the level of the subject site, so there could be a significant flooding problem. He stated that this could probably be resolved on staff level. He stated that staff and Ms. Kennedy have been very cooperative. 9:14 P.M. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Buchanan brought this item back to the Site and Architectural Review Board. Commissioner Sims wanted clarification as to whether, with regard to Condition # 10, they would allow air conditioning and heating units to go on top of the roof. The Planning Director stated that "hidden from the street" gives the applicant the flexibility, but it will provide the benefit of not seeing the units. She said the way it is written, it would be allowed on the roof if necessary. The Associate Planner stated that at the last meeting, verbiage was brought in from the Barton Road Specific Plan which was very detailed, and because the project being looked at that evening dealt more with a residential use and they didn't have that type of verbiage in the code, they were trying to make some type of standard condition for residential. Commissioner Sims had no concern since the adjacent properties were lower than the subject property. Commissioner Hawkinson stated that he has complete sympathy for the applicant's request to defer the street lighting and the sidewalks. The Planning Director stated that if they would like to add some item regarding timing of improvements, it would be appropriate to include this with Option B. The City Engineer stated that the standard agreement for deferment improvements addresses the issue of when the improvements will be installed. He said they are installed at the time the City requests it when the rest of the C 17 MOTION PCM-91-159 SA-91-20 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-159 MOTION PCM-91-160 SA-91-20 area is developed to that standard. Chairman Buchanan said that Item 7 of the recommendations says, "Offer to dedication improvements installed per Planning Commission approval', and this needs to be deleted and replaced with what is described in Option B in the report, with the additional language that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that a standard deferment agreement be executed for installation of sidewalks and street lighting. Chairman Buchanan made a motion to replace Recommendation #7 with the language contained in Option B, to "require a dedication for the ultimate right-of-way, with the 66' installation of improvements per the existing 60' right-of-way provided an agreement is signed whereby the applicant agrees that, in case the General Plan update confirms Preston Street as a collector street, the applicant will need to replace improvements with those required under the General Plan, or in case the General Plan update revises Preston to be a local street, then the City intends to vacate the land with regard to the excessive dedication, and that the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that a standard deferment agreement be executed with respect to the installation of sidewalks and street lighting". Commissioner Hawkinson second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Chairman Buchanan made a motion to revise Condition # 13 to read that a 4' cedar wooden fence shall be constructed on the south property line from the rear to a point approximately equivalent to the top of the slope adjacent to Preston, with the rest of the condition the same regarding the 6' wooden fence on the north property line and the rear fence to be determined at staff level. Commissioner Hawkinson second. Commissioner Wright said the applicant had indicated that they wanted to run 18 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-160 MOTION PCM-91-161 SA-91-20 MOTION VOTE PCM-91-161 the fence to the kitchen or the garage. The Associate Planner said that it was uncertain, as that portion of the driveway is the higher slope area. Chairman Buchanan revised his motion to stated that the 4' cedar wood fence on the south property line from the rear of the property adjacent to the driveway with the exact termination to be determined by staff. Commissioner Hawkinson concurred. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. Commissioner Sims made a motion to approve SA-91-20 as recommended by staff and as conditioned and amended. Commissioner Hawkinson second. Motion carries. 6-0-1-0. Vice -Chairman Hargrave absent. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 9:26 P.M. NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 21, 1991. Respectfully submitted, (7ALW&Ttiii . Patrizia Materassi Planning Director 11-15-91:ma 19 Approved by, Dan Buchanan Chairman, Planning Commission