04/18/1988(:i4
GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 18, 1988
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 April 18, 1988, at 7:00 p.m.
by Chairman, Norman Caouette.
PRESENT: Norman Caouette, Chairman
Fran Van Gelder, Vice -Chairwoman
Gerald Cole, Commissioner
Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner
Jerry Hawkinson, Commissioner
Ray Munson, Commissioner
Jim Sims, Commissioner
ABSENT:
David R. Sawyer, Planning Director
Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney
Joe Kicak, City Engineer
Staff
0 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Hawkinson
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M.
Comments from staff on previous meetings dealing
with General Plan Revision and Public Hearings and
alternative plans presented to City Council.
Discussion on the improvements (undergrounding of
utilities) of Barton Road and question of funding
availability from Southern California Edison.
This information was not presented to the Planning
Commission in earlier meetings. There was also
discussion on the traffic studies dealing with
Barton Road.
Concensus from the Planning Commission that they
would recommend, to the City Council, the four
lanes on Barton Road with the medians.
PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M.
PLANNING COMMISSION SESSION CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M.
Chairman Caouette opened discussion on Item #1,
CUP-88-2, Conditional Use Permit for operation of
a Dry Cleaning Agency.
ITEM #1
CUP-88-2
GANESH SWAMY
SUNRISE DRY CLEANERS
22675 BARTON ROAD
G.T.
The Planning Director presented the staff report
with conditions for approval and recommendations
from staff, reviewing agencies and the City
Engineer. An additional condition was added, that
the water company shall approve any plumbing or
additional water use by the applicant. The
Planning Director explained that the landscaping
had not been specifically worked out with the
applicant and would be subject to his approval.
Commissioner Hargrave brought up question on
signage requirements.
The Planning Director explained applicant was
aware of signage procedures.
PUBLIC HEARING CONVENED
Chairman Caouette asked for discussion from anyone
in favor or opposed to the project. No one came
forward.
PUBLIC HEARING ADJOURNED
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION
Chairman Caouette asked the applicant to address
the Commission.
r.
GANESH SWAMY
10962 RINCON ST.
LOMA LINDA, CA.
MOTION
PCM-88-32
CUP-88-2
MOTION VOTE
PCM-88-32
The applicant stated the business hours would be
from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., open six days a week
(Saturdays closed). He may close early on Fridays
at 4:00 p.m. He stated he was aware that he may
have some difficulty in expanding his business to
include a processing plant.
Discussion was brought up as to the landscaping of
the adjacent lot. The Planning Director stated a
planting area buffer between the two lots could be
incorporated with his conditions when he consults
with the applicant.
COMMISSIONER HARGRAVE MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE
CUP-88-2 AS CONDITIONED WITH THE PLANNING
DIRECTOR'S NOTED REQUIREMENTS ON LANDSCAPING AND
SIGNAGE FACTORS. COMMISSIONER HAWKINSON SECOND.
MOTION CARRIED. ALL AYES. 7-0-0-0.
Chairman Caouette opened discussion for Item #2,
CUP-88-4, conditional use permit to operate a
tanning salon and selling tanning products.
ITEM #2
CUP-88-4
POPE/BIXLER
22400 BARTON ROAD
SUITE 19
The Planning Director presented
with the approved conditions and
from staff, reviewing agencies
Engineer.
PUBLIC HEARING CONVENED
0
3
the staff report
recommendations
and the City
C-~J
0-1
Chairman Caouette opened discussion in favor of
the project.
KEVIN POPE/MARK BIXLER
1955 OVERLAND AVENUE
GRAND TERRACE
They presented a brief description of their
project. Their hours of business would be Monday
through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and
weekends closed at 8:00 p.m.
Discussion by
operation of
requirements.
PAUL GONZALEZ
REPRESENTATIVE OF
CLAUSEN INTERNATIONAL
the Planning Commission on the
the tanning booths and electrical
He stated his responsibility was to train
employees on the physics of the tanning booths,
price requirements, market conditions, and
sanitary conditions.
Chairman Caouette asked if there was any
discussion in opposition to the project. No one
came forward.
PUBLIC HEARING ADJOURNED
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION
MOTION
PCM-88-33
Discussion on generation of sales tax revenue from
this project for the City.
COMMISSIONER MUNSON MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE
CUP-88-4 WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS NOTED.
COMMISSIONER COLE SECOND.
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-88-33 MOTION CARRIED. 7-0-0-0.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED
SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED
ITEM #3
SA-88-2
PAUL WESTBERG FOR
CY DEVELOPMENT
N. OF COMMERCE WAY/
EAST OF MICHIGAN
Chairman Caouette mentioned to the audience that
Item #3, SA-88-2/CY Development had been continued
per the request of the applicant.
Chairman Caouette opened discussion on Item #4,
SA-88-4, site and architectural review approval
for an addition to a communication building.
ITEM #4
SA-88-4
J.D. STEPHENSON
COMCAST CABLE
BLUE MOUNTAIN
(OWNER/CHARLEY GATES)
The Planning Director presented the staff report
with the approved conditions and recommendations
from staff, reviewing agencies and the City
Engineer.
Discussion as to the agreement between owner and
applicant on usage of the easement and
responsibility of maintenance of the site.
Suggestion of shielding the building and air
conditioning unit to prevent obstruction. The
Planning Director mentioned that could be included
as a requirement.
J.D. STEPHENSON
1525 ORCHID DRIVE
SAN BERNARDINO, CA.
Mr. Stephenson mentioned that there was not any
allowable space on the building to put the air
conditioning unit other than the roof area to be
effective. He will also paint the unit the same
color as the building.
5
0
C";
MOTION
PCM-88-34
Commissioner Hargrave withdrew his suggestion on
dealing with the air conditioning unit based on
the remedy provided by Mr. Stephenson.
COMMISSIONER COLE MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE SA-
88-3 SUBJECT TO APPROVED CONDITIONS NOTED.
COMMISSIONER SIMS SECOND.
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-88-34 MOTION CARRIED. ALL AYES. 7-0-0-0.
Chairman Caouette mentioned to the audience that
Item #2, SA-88-2/CY Development had been continued
per the request of the applicant.
Chairman Caouette opened discussion on Item #5,
SA-87-7, site and architectural review approval of
a building design change.
ITEM
SA-87-7-7
THE ADVOCATE SCHOOL
11980 MT. VERNON AVENUE
G.T.
The Planning Director presented the staff report
with approved conditions and recommendations by
staff, reviewing agencies, and the City Engineer.
Presentation of three (3) plans; Site Plan,
previous elevations and color renderings with
noted changes. The long row solar glazed windows
have been changed to independent windows and the
metal roof has been changed to a composite shingle
roof. All of the conditions of the previous Site
and Architectural Review and the Conditional Use
Permit remained the same.
Chairman Caouette asked for discussion from the
Planning Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING CONVENED
Chairman Caouette asked if there was any
discussion from the audience in favor or against
2
the project. There was no discussion.
Discussion of Condition #9 from the previous
resolution. Clarification was needed on the
appropriate pro-rata share of improvements.
The Planning Director explained that since that
time they have calculated a number for those fees
and dealt with it on a staff level with the
applicant. He mentioned staff could research to
provide the Planning Commission with the figure.
Discussion on window ratio per floor space with
recommendation to staff to check the requirement.
KENNETH CLARK
ARCHITECT
THE ADVOCATE SCHOOL
Mr. Clark mentioned that the initial proposal did
exceed the window ratio requirement. The change
was an economic change on their new proposal and
did meet the Uniform Building Code criteria. In
regards to the roofing change it was due to
economics and a needed design change.
Presentation of renderings and plan changes.
Commissioner Hargrave asked what color they were
using on the composition.
Mr. Clark distributed the color board to the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Hargrave asked if the warranty on
the composition was 30 years.
Mr. Clark stated that there was a 20 year warranty
and fire retardant.
Vice -Chairwoman Van Gelder mentioned that since
this section of the building was intended to be
used for headquarters, were these plans different
from the original intention.
Mr. Clark stated that was always the concept in
the plans.
Vice -Chairwoman Van Gelder asked if the changes
would make a difference in parking.
The Planning Director explained that there would
7
c.
be no effect on the parking.
Commissioner Hargrave referred to earlier
discussion on fencing on the south side of the
project. He asked if there would be any changes
on the requirements.
The Planning Director explained that it had not
changed. The previous condition stated that the
applicant was going to work with staff on an
intermittent block wall.
Commissioner Hargrave asked if the Planning
Director was still thinking along those lines in
working with the applicant.
The Planning Director stated he was going along
the lines as directed by the Planning Commission.
Vice -Chairwoman Van Gelder asked if the maximum
count of students set at 120 per condition was
going to change.
Mr. Clark stated the number of enrollment would
remain the same. He explained they removed the
gymnasium and will use those funds to provide in
the future a covered shelter, with no walls, over
the playground.
Commissioner Hargrave asked what type of roofing
composition they would be using.
Mr. Clark could not be specific at this time.
The Planning Director pointed out that such a
cover would require an additional site and
architectural application when it is proposed.
Commissioner Hargrave explained the Planning
Commission would like to see coordination carried
throughout the project.
Commissioner Munson asked the applicant how the
kitchen facility would be used.
Mr. Clark stated the kitchen facilities would be
used by the home -making classes.
Chairman Caouette entertained a motion.
0
c�
MOTION
PCM-88-35
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-88-35
ITEM #6
TTM 13050
FIELDCREST
LANDSCAPING
6
COMMISSIONER HARGRAVE MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE
SA-87-7 WITH NOTED STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. VICE -
CHAIRWOMAN VAN GELDER SECOND.
MOTION CARRIED. ALL AYES. 7-0-0-0.
Chairman Caouette brought up Item #6, TTM 13050,
Fieldcrest, landscaping plans.
The Planning Director presented the staff report
with recommendations and conditions of approval
from staff, reviewing agencies and the City
Engineer.
Chairman Caouette opened up discussion from staff.
Commissioner Cole asked if the street trees were
in compliance with City Code.
The Planning Director explained that the street
trees were the appropriate type but not the
correct size. Staff was requiring that the
applicant replace them with appropriate sizes and
the applicant has agreed.
Commissioner Hargrave questioned why the Planning
Commission was approving after the fact.
The Planning Director pointed out that it was due
to an error. He mentioned that that it was
discovered when it came time for final inspection
on the landscaping. This approval is after the
fact on Phase I but before the fact on Phase II.
Commissioner Sims expressed desire in having
appropriate landscaping on the large slope
(Observation Drive) to prevent excessive weeding
and erosion.
The Planning Director explained all slopes are
indicated on the landscaping plans and that
CO
F
commercial hydroseeding would be used.
Commissioner Sims recommended staff look at the
irrigation system and look at the wind effects on
that system.
Chairman Caouette asked for any further discussion
either for or against the project.
GARY MECHLAIN
FIELDCREST HOMES
Mr. Mechlain mentioned they became aware that they
did not have approval, when the Planning Director
started the final landscaping inspections on their
houses. At that time they immediately scheduled
the submittal of final landscaping approval before
the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Hargrave asked what type of
hydroseeding would be used on the large slope.
Mr. Mechlain stated that the plans before them
dealt with the frontyard landscaping and the large
slope would have the same type of hydroseeding.
' Commissioner Sims expressed his desire to require
a warranty be placed on the germination of the
hydroseed.
The Planning Director mentioned at the time of his
final landscaping inspections he makes sure all of
the landscaping is according to the plans and the
hydroseeding is germinating.
Commissioner Sims stated for the record that it
was a bad decision to put in the large slope.
Discussion on landscaping progress currently on
the project.
Mr. Mechlain gave his project's time schedule and
warranties and guarantees he presently has with
the landscaping company.
Commissioner Sims asked when the hydroseeding
would be completed on the large slope by
Observation Drive.
Mr. Mechlain was not certain due to the irrigation
10
C�
MOTION
PCM-88-36
problems and lack of water service up there.
Commissioner Sims asked if there could be a
condition mentioning a germination period for this
project.
Mr. Mechlain stated they had guarantees and
warranties on the home structures and that it
includes all of the property over and above the
structure itself.
Commissioner Hargrave pointed out to the applicant
that this was a matter of public record now.
Mr. Mechlain stated that the property lines
include that slope all the way to the top for each
homeowner.
The Planning Director stated the fencing plan
would be looked at on a staff level.
Discussion on the feasibility of the homeowners
being able to maintain the large slope.
The Planning Director mentioned those concerns
should have been addressed when the Tentative Map
was presented and not during the approval of the
landscaping plans.
Chairman Caouette summarized that the fence would
probably be at the top of the slope, at the
homeowners backyard, adjacent to the roadway.
Commissioner Sims inquired what area the slope
stabilization would include.
Mr. Mechlain stated that it would be the entire
slope all the way to the back of the property
line.
COMMISSIONER HAWKINSON MADE THE MOTION TO APPROVE
TTM-13050, LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PLANS,
SUBMITTED BY FIELDCREST HOMES. COMMISSIONER COLE
SECOND.
MOTION
VOTE
PCM-88-36 MOTION CARRIED. ALL AYES. 7-0-0-0.
11
SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED.
Commissioner Hargrave mentioned that Chaparral
Pines was advertising for occupancy. He reminded
staff to inform the developer that the City would
require CC&Rs prior to final occupancy permit.
Those CC&Rs would be different than the normal
CC&Rs for typical projects.
The Planning Director stated staff was working
with the City Attorney on the project.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:30 P.M.
Approved by:
Nor an Caoue te, Chairman
Planning Commission
12
Respectfully Submitted,
-O� 04-Q, - —
David R. Sawyer,
Planning Director