Loading...
01/16/1990GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 16, 1990 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 January 16, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner ABSENT: Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner PLEDGE: Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Information from staff to the Planning Commissioners. Information from the Planning Commissioners to staff. Z-89-03 and TTM-89-04 rescheduled for February 6, 1990 Planning Commission meeting. Corrections to December 11, 1989 Planning Commission minutes. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. Public Participation - No comments. I ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - DECEMBER 11, 1989 MOTION PCM-90-1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-1 Commissioner Buchanan made the motion that the minutes of December 11, 1989 be approved with corrections noted during the workshop. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Motion carries. 4-0-2-1. Vice-chairman Buchanan, Commissioners Munson, Hargrave and Van Gelder voted aye, Commissioner Hilkey and Sims absent, and Chairman Hawkinson abstained. ITEM #2 HOP-87-3 RHONDA SANTINI 12242 REED G.T. REVOKATION OF HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT APPEAL OF VIOLATION OF G.T.M.C. 8.04(14) The Community Development Director presented the staff report. He stated that, if the Planning Commission decided that it would be appropriate to allow the applicant to have a certain amount of time to make these corrections and to then allow the Home Occupation Permit to remain in effect if these corrections are made by a certain date, staff would be acceptable to that. Commissioner Hargrave stated that on the original Home Occupation Permit, the applicant signed it on October 21st, and the Community Development Director signed it on July 10th. He asked if the permit is approved before the applicant signs it. The Community Development Director stated that he does sign the permit before the applicant, but that the difference in the dates is not important, that sometimes the applicant comes in immediately and sometimes it takes them a while to come in. Commissioner Hargrave stated that under the type of home occupation it states "clerical office work". He asked if this is a generic classification, or 2 if it was specific as to this permit. The Community Development Director stated this was specific as to this permit, and that the understanding that staff had with the applicant was that the home was needed for office purposes in order to run her business, and that the water truck was not only a commercial vehicle, but it was her only transportation and was used as her transportation to and from work and was conditioned as such. Commissioner Hargrave asked what type of work the applicant was keeping clerical records for. The Community Development Director stated that these records were for her water truck business. Commissioner Van Gelder asked for clarification as to what her business actually was: the water truck or the office part of that. The Community Development Director stated that her business is a water truck business where she provides water for construction sites, but she needed the home address and permission from the city in order to actually run the business out of her home, which is acceptable if certain conditions are met. He stated that it is a water truck business, but that the home is to be used for office purposes and only office -type work was to be done at that location. He stated that any repair of the truck or any storage of anything other than simply parking the truck in the driveway was not to be allowed, but the office portion of the business would be allowed. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the office portion of the business was in question at this time. The Community Development Director stated that the office portion has not been a problem, but the fact that these other violations have occurred is affecting the office portion of the business. He stated that there are alternatives: 1) Revoke the permit completely, 2) The permit could be allowed to remain if the conditions were taken care of, and allow the water truck to continue to just be parked there, or 3) Allow the permit to remain under the condition that the water truck could no longer be parked there. He stated that the water truck itself has not been the problem; the other things that have gone with that have been the problem, such as various other trucks, storage of materials on the sideyard, which could be taken care of by the erection of a fence. He stated that the applicants have had some problems and they have been given some extensions, they have applied for a permit for the fence and it had been picked up on this date, 1-16-90. Chairman Hawkinson asked if there had been complaints from the neighbors. 3 The Community Development Director stated that this is what brought this about initially, but that there had not been any complaints recently. Commissioner Hargrave, referring to the photo taken in October, asked if the tow truck was just coincidentally in the picture. The Community Development Director stated that this was part of the complaint, however, there was a meeting with the applicant and the owner of the tow truck, and the owner indicated that he was a friend of the applicant and just parked his truck there because that was what he drove, and he had indicated at that point that if this was a problem, he wouldn't park the truck there, and he would drive something else over to see his friend. He stated that there have been no complaints of the tow truck since then. Commissioner Munson asked if a permit had been pulled for building a fence, to which the Community Development Director replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Buchanan asked what items were still in violation other than the fence as of this date. The Community Development Director stated that there is still a question regarding additional vehicles that are parked out in front and whether or not they are actually commercial vehicles or non-commercial vehicles, and if they are non-commercial vehicles, what the real need is to have them parked there. Chairman Hawkinson asked for further questions or comments from staff and proceeded to call the applicant to the microphone. Rhonda Santini 12242 Reed G.T. Ms. Santini apologized for the matter getting this far, stating that she has had major personal problems including bankruptcy and trying to pull her house out of foreclosure, which she did, as well as the holidays and trying to work her business the best she could before the rains came. She stated that a lot of things didn't happen like she hoped. She stated that this whole thing started because of her friend who would drive his tow truck over when visiting. A neighbor didn't care for the loud noise the truck made. She stated that the neighbor came over and was very rude, and that her friend apologized and stated it would not happen again. She stated that her friend came over again one evening at 6:00 p.m. but did not make the noise. She stated that the neighbor came over again and was very rude to her fiance, who stated that they have a home occupation permit. She n u stated that whether or not her friend comes by with the tow truck has nothing to do with her business, and that if her permit or business license was taken away, this would not mean that he would not come by any longer. She stated that they were told he could stay for 72 hours without moving the tow truck. She stated that the complainant had his parents living in an R.V. outside of his house with an electrical cord running out of it for one week. She stated that she did not cause any problems with this at all. She stated that his complaint started all of this and brought attention to the extra vehicles at her house. She stated that her sister had her van there, her fiance had a van, then he had a truck, and that she had some mechanical problems which she works on herself on her own truck. She stated that she does have the fence up and she is ready for final inspection, the van is gone as it was sold on this date, 1-16-90, and there are only two vehicles owned by herself and her fiance, who also lives at her house, and these are the utility truck, which is his only form of transportation, and her truck, which is her only form of transportation. She stated that she got the Home Occupation Permit to do her clerical work, but she also had to have a business license because she uses her post office box as her business address so she can keep her home and business separate. She stated that she would like to continue using Grand Terrace for her business. Chairman Hawkinson asked for clarification of keeping home and business separate. Ms. Santini stated that being a female in construction, she doesn't want people to know where she lives. She stated that all of her business mail goes to her post office box, but she does her clerical work out of her home. Chairman Hawkinson asked if the water truck was the only commercial vehicle, to which Ms. Santini replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Hargrave asked if the pink truck was used as the only means of transportation when the home occupation permit was issued. Ms. Santini responded in the affirmative, and stated that it has been since November of 1988 when her car was repossessed. She stated there have been other vehicles around her house because of friends coming by and her sister moving in. She stated that her fiance's vehicle and only form of transportation is the white, utility truck. Commissioner Hargrave stated that the regulations say this is a commercial vehicle and is not really part of the Home Occupation Permit and technically should be parked off -site. Ms. Santini stated that she is confused by this, stating that she is sure there is an ordinance as far as weight limits for commercial vehicles, but that there are no signs posted as far as where they can and cannot park. 5 Commissioner Hargrave stated that the Home Occupation Permit doesn't involve the ability for Ms. Santini to park the commercial vehicle there as a matter of its parking area. He asked what Ms. Santini's normal work hours are. Ms. Santini stated that her work day could begin anywhere from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. Commissioner Hargrave asked if Ms. Santini has had any complaints of noise being that the truck is a diesel truck, to which Ms. Santini responded in the negative. He asked if, when she repairs the truck, if she does it in her driveway. Ms. Santini stated that she takes it to a yard in Fontana. Chairman Hawkinson asked if the water truck is Ms. Santini's sole source of income, to which she responded in the affirmative. Chairman Hawkinson stated that it looks like the majority of the violations had been addressed. The Community Development Director stated that he was out at the residence at 3:30 p.m. on the afternoon of this date, 1-16-90, and the fence had not yet been put up. Ms. Santini stated that she picked up the permit at 2:30, and since that time the fence has gone up. Chairman asked Ms. Santini if, in her opinion, she had complied with all of the areas which were in violation, to which Ms. Santini replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Buchanan asked for staffs recommendation, stating that the item either needs to be continued or make some kind of findings with a short time span for staff to verify the situation. The Community Development Director stated that continuing the item to the next meeting would give staff time to verify compliance, and that the decision could be made at the next meeting. Commissioner Van Gelder asked, if in fact Ms. Santini is in compliance with the fence and the removal of the extra vehicles, what would be done about the commercial vehicle being parked in such an area. The Community Development Director stated that it could be kept as it is now, to where she can park it in the driveway, but as long as it is not parked on the street and not used for servicing or other activities. He 6 MOTION PCM-90-2 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-2 stated that another alternative is that the truck needs to be parked elsewhere. He suggested that the truck continue to be parked in the driveway as long as the items are taken care of. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that although Ms. Santini missed one of her first meetings and has been a little tardy, she commends her for trying to keep her head above water. The Community Development Director stated that she didn't miss one of the first meetings, but that she had called at the time of the meeting and it was discussed over the phone. Commissioner Buchanan moved that Item #2 regarding Rhonda Santini be continued until the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting of February 6, 1990, to give staff an opportunity to confirm that the violations have been corrected. Commissioner Van Gelder second. Ms. Santini stated that she would be able to attend the next meeting. Motion carries. 5-0-2-0. Commissioners Hilkey and Sims absent. ITEM #3 CUP-89-07 James Blaisdell 22400 Barton Road, Suite 200 G.T. GENERAL ASSEMBLY ROOM MOTION PCM-90-3 Chairman Hawkinson stated that Item #3 has been requested to continue to the February 6, 1990 meeting. Commissioner Hargrave moved that Item #3 be continued to the February 6, 1990, Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Munson second. 7 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-3 Motion carries. 5-0-2-0. Commissioners Hilkey and Sims absent. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:35 P.M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 7:35 P.M. No items for discussion. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 7:35 P.M. Respectfully submitted, avid R. Sawyer Community Developm t Director 01-16-90 93 Approved by, er a inson rman P anning Commission