11/20/1989GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 20, 1989
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 20, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson.
PRESENT: Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman
Dan Buchanan, Commissioner
Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner
Herman Hilkey, Commissioner
Ray Munson, Commissioner
Jim Sims, Commissioner
Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner
David R. Sawyer, Community Development Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Maria Muett, Assistant Planner
ABSENT:
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M.
Information presented by staff to the Commissioners.
Information regarding the change of the Planning Commission Meeting of
December 18, 1989 to December 11, 1989.
Information regarding the Planning Commission Meetings change to the 2nd
and 4th Tuesdays of every month, effective January 2, 1989.
Discussion regarding the legal Public Hearing Notification of the Barton
Road Specific Plan; legal advertisement in The Sun, property owners within
the Specific Plan, Chamber of Commerce Newsletter, Community Services
newsletter, and hand delivery to business owners in the Specific Plan.
Concensus agreed upon to move item # 2 to the placement of item #3, to
hear SA-89-09 first.
1
Discussion regarding the GTI Market and conversations between the
Community Development Director and attorney for Mr. Lee, Bargain Barn.
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - There were no comments from the public.
ITEM # 1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 6, 1989
MOTION
PCM-89-103
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-103
Chairman Hawkinson opened the Planning Commission Meeting with item
# 1, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 11, 1989.
Commissioner Buchanan made the motion to approve the Planning
Commission Minutes of November 6, 1989. Commissioner Hilkey second.
Motion carried, all ayes. 7-0-0-0.
PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED AT 7:10 P.M.
SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 7:10 P.M.
ITEM #3
SA-89-09
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
JIM WYMAN
22130 MAVIS STREET
GRAND TERRACE
The Assistant Planner, Maria Muett, presented the staff report with the
conditions of approval and recommendations by the reviewing agencies, City
Engineer and the Planning Department staff.
2
Discussion on the fencing, landscaping and irrigation plans to be submitted
for approval to the Planning Department.
Applicant
Jim Wyman
1401 E. Santo Antonio Drive
Colton, CA
Discussion on the roofing materials and wear warranty of 25 years. The
applicant responded if the material does not meet the fire rating standards
he would be willing to upgrade to meet those standards.
PUBLIC HEARING CONVENED AT 7:30 P.M.
No comments.
PUBLIC HEARING ADJOURNED AT 7:30 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
MOTION
PCM-89-104
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-104
Commissioner Buchanan made the motion to approve SA-89-09 subject to
the recommended conditions of approval by the Planning Department.
Commissioner Munson second.
Motion carried, all ayes. 7-0-0-0.
Commissioner Hargrave asked staff to check on the roofing materials
meeting fire retardant conditions.
SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 7:40 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION CONVENED AT 7:40 P.M.
ITEM #2
SP-89-02
BARTON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN
COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR
3
Chairman Hawkinson opened the next item, Barton Road Specific Plan, for
discussion.
The Community Development Director presented the staff report indicating
the purpose of the Barton Road Specific Plan. He identified the groups
responsible for working on the BRSP; the Advisory Committee
(representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, Planning Commission,
general citizenry, and staff) and the four (4) work sessions that took place.
In addition to the Advisory Committee a Joint City Council and Planning
Commission Workshop was held to insure that the plan was not being
prepared in a vacuum and that the appropriate issues were being addressed.
The Community Development Director made staffs recommendation that
the Planning Commission approve the attached resolution recommending
that the City Council approve the Barton Road Specific Plan and its
associated Negative Declaration.
Mark Brodeur
Ron Pflugrath
Urban Studio
Barton Road Specific Plan
Consultants
The Consultants from Urban Design Studio, Mark Brodeur and Ron
Pflugrath, gave an indepth presentation of the Barton Road Specific Plan.
Commissioner Hargrave asked the consultants to review the current and long
term street scape.
Mr. Brodeur pointed out that Barton Road does not present itself very well
to the travelers coming off of I-215. Barton Road really needs to make a
statement and this can be enhanced through street scape and proper signage.
Pedestrian amenities can be added such as light standards, paved crosswalks
etc. The focus of the plan should be at Mt. Vernon and Barton Road by
creating a town center atmosphere.
Mr. Brodeur explained that it was crucial to have the City Hall included in
the village. It would be a mistake to stop the streetscape here because the
perception needed was to give the traveller a civic center feeling versus an
AP Zone.
Discussion on incentive basis along the corridor to enhance the streetscape.
Commissioner Hargrave referred to the school location and future of that
property.
4
Mr. Brodeur explained that he felt there would be great development
potential of the school property in the future. If the school was to stay
there another 50 years, then the only opportunity of streetscape
improvements would be between the curb facing and the fence.
Discussion on whether or not the recommendation of extending Reed Street
was essential to the Barton Road Specific Plan.
Mr. Brodeur explained that extending Reed Street would not do anything
for the commercial developments but it would allow the people in the
residential areas a way to filter out of the neighborhoods. It would allow
quicker access for emergency vehicles to enter and exit the area.
Discussion on signalized intersections at the site.
Discussion by the consultants and the Planning Commission of the proposed
extension of Reed Street and the signalization of Canal Street.
Commissioner Hilkey asked how much of the Barton Road Specific Plan
document could be changed.
Mr. Brodeur explained that if the Planning Commission desired changes then
those recommendations would be presented to the City Council.
Commissioner Hilkey asked for clarification of page III-4 (Item B), Non -
Conforming Uses of Land.
Mr. Brodeur explained that the intent of this section was not to allow the
movement of a non -conforming use from one site to another site within the
Specific Plan area after the Specific Plan is adopted.
Commissioner Hilkey requested clarification on page III-9, footnote in the
Village -Commercial Area, Hobby/Craft Shop, of "a Conditional Permit
required for outdoor exhibits and activities."
Mr. Brodeur stated that the intent was to address the type of activity that
the hobby or craft shop anticipates.
Commissioner Hilkey asked what the difference was between a hobby or
craft shop use and the setting out of quilts for sale.
Discussion on the consultants interpretation of each use and the worse
possible scenario anticipated.
The Community Development Director explained that the current code
prohibits any outdoor activities for any C-2 uses in the C-2 Zone. Actually
5
in the Specific Plan some flexibility is being addressed to allow some
activities to be outside.
Commissioner Hilkey referred to III-11, General Commercial, and expressed
his concern with whether or not the setbacks were functional throughout the
area.
The Community Development Director explained that the consultants and
himself have gone over this in detail and feel that they are functional.
Discussion on page III-20, Signs, and the current sign code. Mr. Brodeur
explained that some sign design guidelines based on National Sign Standards
relative to visibility, speed limit and those design guidelines in Chapter 4-
27, have been incorporated in the Specific Plan.
Mr. Brodeur explained that the City should try to create an environment
that blends in with the surrounding areas.
Commissioner Hilkey asked for clarification of III-27, paragraph 2.
"Therefore the Planning Commission shall have the discretionary authority
to grant incentive bonuses in the way of relaxed development regulations.
Reduce processing fees..."
Mr. Brodeur explained that the Planning Commission has the ability to
waive certain site development standards based on this section. He pointed
out that as more and more lots are consolidated the efficiency of that lot
is increased subsequently the site development standards could be reduced.
Discussion of powers by the Planning Commission and the City Council
regarding incentive bonuses.
Discussion on the proposed landscaping features and types of shrubbery and
trees along Barton Road.
Commissioner Hilkey asked for clarification whether or not the Mobile
Home Park was to be included in the Specific Plan.
The Community Development Director explained that the Mobile Home
Park is in the Specific Plan area. There are different maps which identify
a Master Plan area or other areas. The Mobile Home Park is not in the
Master Plan area but it is still in the Specific Plan area.
Commissioner Van Gelder referred to page II-13, entrance sign at the west
end of the commercial corridor, and asked for the exact proposed location.
Mr. Brodeur explained that generally the median should be 20' long but
could be as long as 60' feet to control turning movements between the
6
offramp and Michigan Avenue. He suggested that the decision for the
length of that median would be best left to the Traffic Engineer.
Discussion on the Chamber of Commerce's proposed monument sign design
and location.
Discussion on the proposed widening of Barton Road as called for in the
General Plan.
Commissioner Van Gelder expressed her concern with the monument sign
and its close proximity to the school on Barton Road.
Discussion on the proposed signage in the storefront windows, pages III-
23/24. Commissioner Van Gelder expressed her concern with the proposed
20-25% coverage of the windows and the time being allowed.
Mr. Brodeur pointed out that holiday decorations, as long as they did not
advertise products within the store, would be allowed as a normal course.
Discussion on the parking layouts and surrounding landscaped coverage
along the block walls. Commissioner Van Gelder questioned the safety
factor.
Mr. Brodeur stated that they were proposing well lit parking lights which
should be confined to that site itself rather than spreading to surrounding
residential areas.
Discussion by Mr. Brodeur regarding Commissioner Van Gelder's idea that
the liquor store and barber shop on the comer of Mt. Vernon Avenue and
Barton Road be considered as a historical site.
Commissioner Buchanan praised the Barton Road Specific Plan document.
He presented editorial suggestions to the consultants.
Discussion on page I-4, paragraph 1, Summary of Specific Plan Policy. Mr.
Brodeur pointed out that the intent was for the rehabilitation of existing
uses.
Discussion on page 11-4, Circulation Goals, Objectives and Policies.
Commissioner Buchanan proposed bicycle lanes from the residential areas
to Barton Road to draw local residents into the village area.
The Community Development Director pointed out that in the Parking
Code, bicycle parking facilities are addressed.
Discussion regarding page IV-32, General Guidelines, "...save existing trees
where possible, approval must be obtained for removal of all trees having
7
trunk diameter of 10" or more measured 48" above existing grade."
Commissioner Buchanan suggested including some restriction on the
elimination of mature trees in the nature of a demolition permit. Discussion
on the feasibility of establishing a City-wide tree preservation program.
Discussion on page III-4, Non -Conforming Structures. Commissioner
Buchanan stated that it seems to allow some conforming developments in
a non -conforming situation.
Mr. Brodeur explained that it was decided earlier that this plan would not
force people out of single family homes in the next 10-20 years. Most
importantly Barton Road possesseses a tremendous commercial and
economic potential.
Discussion on page III-4, 6D, "...no additional structure not conforming with
the requirements of the Specific Plan shall be erected in connection with
non -conforming use of the land."
Discussion on page III-4, 7A, "...no such non -conforming signs shall be
enlarged, altered to increase its non -conformity." Mr. Brodeur explained
that the proposed sign program will not be initiated by force.
BREAK
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARING CONVENED AT 8:50 P.M.
1. Dr. William Darwin
Dental Practice
22284 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
Dr. Darwin presented his business history in the City. He explained that
he is proposing to build a 6,000 square foot medical and dental building.
If the Specific Plan is adopted then he will have to abandon his project due
to the 300 ft. frontage and 200 ft. driveway requirements, and also the
reciprocal parking agreement requirement. He requested that those items
be excluded from the Specific Plan on the northside of Barton Road from
Canal to Vivienda.
2. Kathryn Harmon
Real Estate Broker
11834 Kingston Avenue
Grand Terrace
Ms. Harmon explained that she has had a listing on Barton Road for the
past year. It began with 12 acres (12 families) and has now grown to 18
acres. The area from Vivienda to Canal Street, northside of Barton Road,
presents a problem in complying with the Specific Plan. There are only 8
property owners in that section and from her observation there are only 2
vacant lots. Dr. Gregory, the property owner of the corner lot of Vivienda,
would like to sell. The property next to him is Urgent Care and has no
intention of selling. The third lot is vacant and owned by Barney Karger.
The next lot is vacant also. The fourth lot is a duplex and is owned by Rex
Edmundson. The next property owners are senior citizens and have no
intention of selling. She proposed that the aforementioned sections be
eliminated from the Specific Plan. She stated the Specific Plan has
flexibility and should encourage development.
3. Fernando La Fuertes
22238 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
Discussion on the widening of Barton Road and the undergrounding utility
program. He asked if that would effect any of the earlier dedications along
Barton Road.
The Community Development Director explained that would not have any
effect because the right of way dedicated was being used for that.
Discussion on the General Plan/Circulation Element and the Traffic
Engineer's recommendation to provide for more traffic and contact the
property owners to increase the dedication for 120' feet. The City Council
stated they already had dedications from the property owners for 100' feet
and wished to stay with that.
Mr. La Fuertes asked if there would be any dedication from the City back
to the principal owners for any unused portion of that original 17' feet that
was dedicated under the other conditions.
The Community Development Director explained that the conditions have
not really changed as far as the dedication. The City is still operating under
the same dedication agreements that were arrived at earlier.
Mr. La Fuertes explained that he was under the impression that the 17'
dedication was to enhance a center divider. Mr. La Fuertes explained that
the Specific Plan's intent and expectations need to be defined and clarified.
Discussion by the consultants of the Specific Plan and its intent of clarifying
the requirements for quality development on Barton Road.
E
Discussion on page II-9, consolidation of small parcels or property. Mr. La
Fuertes asked what is considered small parcels or property. Mr. La Fuertes
objected to this provision.
Discussion on the feasibility of an extension to existing garage, or build a
patio to the back of the front house on Mr. La Fuertes' property.
The Community Development Director explained that he would be a non-
conforming use and the expansion capabilities would be limited to the
requirements of the non -conforming use section of the code. Basically, the
Specific Plan would not put any additional burden on this property. The
current zone of C-2 already creates a non -conforming situation.
Discussion on the placement of the monument sign on Barton Road. Mr.
La Fuertes expressed his concern with the widening of Barton Road and
traffic increase causing a hazard to the school children.
4. Mary Lou Williams
22270 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
Mrs. Williams was in agreement with Dr. Darwin. She disagreed with the
O 300 ft. frontage requirement. She felt that this requirement would slow
development and devalue the properties.
Discussion on the feasibility and possible location of left turn lanes.
5. Herman H. Armstrong
12072 Preston Avenue
Grand Terrace
Mr. Armstrong is a property owner in the triangle area. He suggested
various commercial developments to meet the needs of the City.
6. Quentin Smith
Property Owner - 22408 to 22478 Barton Road
22607 Tanager
Grand Terrace
Mr. Smith praised the Barton Road Specific Plan. He did object to the 300'
frontage and the 200' driveway entrances to properties. He cautioned that
intense landscaping would obstruct view from the streets into the centers.
He suggested that raised mounds would serve much more adequate than a
O wall.
10
Ele
7. Helen Springfield
22273 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
Mrs. Springfield objected to the 300' frontage and the 200' driveway
entrance. Her property is 140'wide x 200' deep.
8. Rex Edmundson
Property Owner - 22220 and 22226 Barton Road
22111 Newport Avenue, Space 164
Grand Terrace
Mr. Edmundson objected to the 300' frontage and the 200' driveway
requirements. He agreed with the architectural requirements.
9. Bill Darwin
Property Owner
23172 Palm Avenue
Grand Terrace
Mr. Darwin stated that the taking of individual property rights is a serious
matter and many believe it is a violation of constitutional rights. He
objected to the 300' frontage and the 200' driveway entrance, and the
parking agreement requirements. He stated that under the Barton Road
Specific Plan certain properties would be landlocked. He concluded that
the northside of Barton Road should be excluded from the Barton Road
Specific Plan.
10. Dan R. Bettle
Administrator of the Azure Hills
Seventh Day Adventist Church
22633 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
Mr. Bettle requested a change in wording under the Land Use Matrix, Page
111-8. He requested that churches and associated school facilities be a
permitted use rather than a Conditional Use.
11
p 11. Tony Petta
�J Citizen and Property Owner
11875 Eton Avenue
Grand Terrace
61
He stated that he did not object to the overall concept of the Barton Road
Specific Plan. He did express concern that future development would cause
traffic hazards. He agreed with Mr. La Fuertes comments regarding traffic
congestion near the freeway. He encouraged the City to look into freeway
changes immediately. He encouraged freeway enhancement to entice future
development.
PUBLIC HEARING ADJOURNED AT 9:35 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION CONVENED AT 9:35 P.M.
Commissioner Buchanan referred to page III-6, paragraph 14, dealing with
outdoor uses versus Conditional Use Permits.
Discussion on clarification of outdoor uses.
Discussion on alcoholic beverages being sold near a school facility.
Commissioner Buchanan asked if there was mechanism to regulate or
restrict alcoholic uses within the Specific Plan.
The Community Development Director explained that a statement could be
added on in the plan.
Discussion on clarification of "non conforming use" category for the school
facilities.
The City Attorney explained that the schools do not come under any
Municipal Code regulations.
Discussion pertaining to clarification of temporary versus permanent window
signs.
Discussion regarding page 1II-29, consolidation incentive program to
encourage development.
Commissioner Buchanan referred to page III-30, the statement "...the bonus
shall be an overall reduction of required spaces by 20%, should read
"maybe".
12
MOTION
PCM-89-105
PCM-89-105
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-105
Commissioner Hargrave made the motion to continue the Barton Road
Specific Plan to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Van Gelder second
Discussion on the time needed for Urban Design Studio to revise the Barton
Road Specific Plan for the December 14, 1989, City Council Meeting.
Commissioner Hargrave amended his previous motion to continue the
Barton Road Specific Plan. Commissioner Van Gelder second.
Motion failed, 3-4-0-0. Commissioners Hilkey, Hawkinson, Buchanan and
Munson voted noe. Commissioners Van Gelder, Hargrave and Sims voted
aye.
Discussion on pages IV-29 and IV-30, clarification on freestanding sign
guidelines and visual landscaping concept.
BREAK 10:03 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION CONVENED 10:15 P.M.
Discussion on clarification of master plans in the Specific Plan.
Commissioner Sims requested a more detailed graphic concept of master
plans.
The Community Development Director explained that the General Plan
addresses the subject projects at maximum buildout.
Discussion regarding Measure I Funds in conjunction with the widening of
the Barton Road bridge. Discussion on the feasibility of traffic studies for
individual projects.
Discussion regarding school facility proposed zoning and future development.
13
MOTION
PCM-89-106
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-106
MOTION
PCM-89-107
Mr. Brodeur referred to page III-3, the amendment procedure for the
Barton Road Specific Plan. He encouraged the City to look at it every 4-
5 years.
Discussion on the feasibility of litigation problem areas in the Barton Road
Specific Plan.
Discussion on the Environmental Impact Analysis. Mr. Brodeur explained
that their firm did not compile the EIA.
Definition of public facility in the Land Use Matrix.
Commissioner Hilkey inquired if Dr. Darwin's expansion, dental office,
would be allowed in area H.
The Community Development Director pointed out that that use would be
permitted in all three areas.
Commissioner Hilkey made the motion to adopt the following changes to
SP-89-02, Barton Road Specific Plan document. To add an additional
statement to include bike trails leading to the residential areas but not off
of Barton Road. To add an additional statement of combining churches and
associated school facilities to be a permitted use rathar than a Conditional
Use Permit in Table I, Land Use Matrix, Office/Professional Subarea 3, on
page III-8 and amend the statement on page III-30, in reference to the
parking reduction of 20% the wording to be changed from "shall' to
"maybe". Commissioner Buchanan second.
Motion carried, all ayes. 7-0-0-0.
Commissioner Buchanan made the recommendation from staff that the
public facilities be added to the land use matrix with a Conditional Use
Permit in all three zones. Commissioner Sims second.
14
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-107
MOTION
PCM-89-108
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-108
MOTION
PCM-89-109
Motion carried, all ayes. 7-0-0-0.
Discussion on the perameters of temporary and permanent uses, Land Use
Matrix Table. Definition of outdoor uses in the three subareas. The City
Attorney pointed out that if the uses were addressed instead of the
temporary or permanent argument.
Commissioner Buchanan made the motion to modify paragraph # 14 on page
III-6, regarding outdoor uses. The wording should have the intent that all
uses shall take place within a completely enclosed building except for those
outdoor uses approved with a Conditional Use Permit as provided for in the
Barton Road Specific Plan. The outdoor display of merchandise is
prohibited through the Specific Plan area. An additional footnote, "Farmer's
Market, Ice Cream/Yogurt Shops and Restaurant Uses in all zones."
Commissioner Sims second.
Motion carried, all ayes. 7-0-0-0.
Commissioner Buchanan made the motion that a Conditional Use Permit
be required for the offsale of alcoholic beverages within 500 foot of a public
school facility. Commissioner Van Gelder second.
Discussion regarding the regulatory guidelines under the Alcoholic Beverage
Control. The Community Development Director explained that currently
the City does not require Conditional Use Permits for this use.
Chairman Hawinson mentioned for the record that he would vote against
the motion because of the 500 foot restriction and is in favor of a
Conditional Use Permit.
15
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-109
MOTION
PCM-89-110
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-89-110
Motion carried. 4-3-0-0. Commissioners Hilkey, Van Gelder, Buchanan and
Sims voted aye. Commissioners Hawkinson, Munson and Hargrave voted
noe.
Discussion regarding requirement for Conditional Use Permit to sell offsale
or offsite alcoholic beverages throughout the City.
Discussion regarding recommendation to City Council for a tree preservation
program.
Commissioner Hilkey made the motion to adopt the attached resolution
recommending the City Council approve SP-89-02 (Barton Road Specific
Plan) and its associated Negative Declaration with the recommended
additions and changes. Commissioner Sims second.
Motion carried. 5-2-0-0. Commissioners Hilkey, Van Gelder, Hawkinson,
Buchanan and Sims voting aye. Commissioners Hargrave and Munson voted
noe.
Chairman Hawkinson adjourned to the next scheduled Planning Commission
Meeting on December 11, 1989.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:30 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
David R. Sawyer,
Community Development Director
P.C. Meeting
11-20-89
16
Approved By,
Aawkinson, r,
Chairman
Planning Commission