Loading...
10/03/1983 Grand Terrace Planninc; Commission Minutes of Regular .leeting October 3, 1983 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on October 3, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Sanford L. Collins. PRESENT : Sanford L. Collins, Chairman William DeBenedet, Commissioner Norm Caouette, Commissioner Winifred Bartel, Commissioner Gerald Cole, Commissioner Jerry Hawkinson, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Joseph Kicak, Planning Director ABSENT : John McDowell, Vice Chairman Vern Andress, Commissioner PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE : Led by Winifred Bartel MINUTES : Motion by Commissioner DeBenedet, seconded by Commissioner Hawkinson, passed by 7-0 PC(L1 83-61 vote to approve the minutes of September 12, 1983 as submitted. NEW BUSINESS ITEM NO. 2 SA 83-6, 12076 Westwood Lane Staff presented the proposal submitted by Mr. Marshall Rainer of COR Company, applicant's representative to construct a footbridge between Lot 5 and Lot 6 of Tract 6311 . Both of the lots are owned by the applicant. The purpose of the footbridge is to provide easier access from Lot 6 which is to be used primarily for parking for the guests of the property owner, Dr. Carlson. Commissioner Caouette suggested that consideration be given to merging Lots 5 and 6 into one parcel, serving a single residence. Public hearing was opened at 7:05 p.m. Speaking for the proposed project was Mr. Marshall Rainer of COR Company, representing the applicant. Mr. Rainer presented photographs of the existing conditions and explained the proposal as it would relate to these conditions. He stated that Dr. Carlsen's intent is to utilize the vacant lot for parking only and has no plans to build on the vacant lot in the future. Page 1 of 4 It was stated by Mr. Rainer that there will be lighting on the bridge as well parking lot. Mr. Frank Rappolo addressed the Commission on this matter. He stated he was speaking in favor of the proposal. Stated that the lots should be combined. He did state that both parcels affected should have been shaded on the map. He felt that the proposed improvement will enhance the value of the property. The public hearing was closed at 7: 15 p.m. Commissioner Caouette expressed his reasons for the added condition that the two parcels be combined into a single parcel. Other Commissioners concurred that with the proposed structure, specifically the bridge, no additional single family residence should be permitted on these two lots. The staff recommended to the Commission that if the two parcels are combined into a single parcel, the clearance requirement in the staff report, specifically Condition No. 4, be deleted and plan approved as submitted, subject to all other conditions. Commissioner Andress came in at 7: 18 p.m. PCM 83-62 Motion by Commissioner Caouette, seconded by Commissioner De Benedet. The Planning Commis- sion approved by a vote of 5 - 2 the site and architectural development plan SA 83-6, including the findings as written in the staff report and subject to conditions as set forth in the staff report with the following modifications: 1 . That the two parcels be merged into a single parcel. 2. Deleting staff-recommended Condition No. 4, pertaining to 15 foot minimum clearance. ITEM NO. 3 Draft, Grand Terrace Redevelopment Implementation Strategy Mr. Robb Steele, representing MSI , presented a brief summary of the contents of the report. He summarized the goals as adopted by CRA and discussed the implementation strategy as proposed in the report to achieve these goals. A great deal of discussion took place between the MSI representative and the individual Planning Commissioners. Topics discussed in general were the following: For Area "A" a possibility was suggested for a mixed use of commercial as well as residential. Area "B", which is presently zoned commercial, was suggested to retain its present designation. Page 2 of 4 Planning Commission October 3, 1983 It was suggested that if the City and CRA wishes to maintain the integrity of Area "B" for future commercial uses, the area can be temporarily designa- ted as open space. This would prevent any undesirable encroachment into that area. It was also the opinion of the representative that 200 acres in Area "B" which composes both industrial and commercial designations could be absorbed in 5 to 7 years. However, did not feel that much can be accom- plished in the next 5 years. A question was raised regarding the potential use of Area "A", generally the frontage of Barton Road between Canal Street and Michigan Street for mixed uses, since studies indicate that approximately 27 percent vacancy exists in the office-commercial development which now is available. The representative stated that the City of Grand Terrace is dis- advantaged because of areas that have recently developed, specifically in San Bernardino Commercenter as well as Colton Cooley Ranch that offer similar office accommodations and, in fact, these areas in other cities are presently expanding. It was suggested by MSI representative that consideration should be given to low-cost, high-density housing. It was stated that such housing may be more beneficial to the City, since this type of development requires less police, fire, school and other public services. Certain members of the Commission disagreed with that opinion and pointed to other projects within the City that indicate otherwise. MSI agreed that with higher income clientele housing, you also reduce demand for these same services. With respect to developing of public facilities, it was the opinion of the MSI representative that the public facilities should be developed in balance between the existing and any proposed new development. It was stated that consideration should be given to relocating the Grand Terrace Elementary School to other portion of the City and utilizing that freeway oriented parcel for potential commercial uses. The vacancies of 27 percent in office prompted a remark that City should have considered utilizing the existing vacant office space for City offices rather than considering a new Civic Center. It was suggested that it may be too late for that type of discussion. For Area "C" it was recommended by MSI representative that high-density residential be considered. It was suggested that high-density residential within the City be beneficial to the present as well as future commercial development. It was recognized that that area is in the flood plain and much of the area is covered with Southern California Edison Company easements. With that discussion, it was suggested that potential industrial uses of that land be considered. The survey which has been conducted by MSI of the various property owners in the three areas was questioned and discussed. In general, it was felt by at least one commissioner that the survey results need to be further clarified. Adjournment Chairman Collins adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. Page 3 of 4 Planning Commission October 3, 1983 Respectfully submitted by: Joseph Kicak, Planning Director Approved: e SanforA L. Collins Chairman Page 4 of 4 Grand Terrace Planning Commission October 3, 1983