Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout08/07/1984BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 7, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 7, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Acting Chairman Thompson presiding: 1. Call to Order at 7:07 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. On Roll Call the following Commissioners were present: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. Chairman Berg was excused. 4. Planning Director, Ronald L. Larson was introduced to Commissioner. Item No. 1 The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 17, 1984 was approved as submitted. Item No. 2 An Appeal of Curb and Gutter Improvements for 80 California Avenue (Manzanares 84 -SP -5) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report concerning the appli- cant's appeal and informed the Commission that Item #6 on the agenda (Zoning Ord. Amendment regarding the Installation of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks - Amendment to Ordinance 490) which involves a suggested change to the zoning ordinance might have a bearing on this applicant's case. Mr. Ruben Manzanares (son of the owner of the property), of 815 Edgar, informed the ommission that they will comply with the city's require- ments; are willing to improve the curb and gutter at a future date whenever the other properties are developed, or if the city at some point feels the need to have the curb and gutter put in, then they are also willing to enter into an agreement with the city on this matter; had concern about Caltrans, as to whether or not they were going to im- prove the road. Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of the City Council, felt this Item should be set over until a decision is made on Item #6. The Commission felt that its decision had to be based on the ordinance as it now exists. On motion by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the Commission voted to approve the denial as recommended by the Planning Director and refer this applicant to the City Council with the follow- ing roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 2 Those Speaking in Opposition were: Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of the City Council, addressed the Planning Commission on 5 different occasions concerning this item. His feelings were: the choice of location for the heavy density is completely un- realistic; other areas should be considered, does not want Beaumont to become a jungle like Sunnymead; give the Planning Director time to be- come acquainted with this area; would like to see further study done and it all be put together in a package. Mr. Earl Woodley, 555 E. 8th St., objects to the 32 units /acre - thinks its too many - doesn't trust politicians. Those Speaking in Favor Commenting or Inquiring were: Mr. Gary Coty, resides between 9th and 10th Magnolia, addressed the Commission on two different occasions concerning this item. Wanted to know about the regulations - thinks the increase is a good move. Mr. Bernie Fagot, P. 0. Box 1085, Cherry Valley - wanted to better understand the General Plan Amendments. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, address the Commission on 4 different occasions pertaining to this issue informing the Commission that: this proposal is an attempt to correct a situation that this city was placed in by reason of the action of the adoption of the General Plan; feels that for the benefit of the city, Commission should adopt these General Plan Amendments; this is the tool that you need to work with in the future; in order to consider another increased area, it must be advertised to the public; feels it is time for the city to start doing things instead of delaying; is making a strong plea because of its importance. Mr. Jack Smith, a general contractor, thinks this would be a good move; that land here in the city is not zoned to a high enough density to make it viable. Mr. Kenneth Fagot, 435 Sheri Court, favors the increase, however, he does not feel that the sphere of influence is large enough. There being no one else wishing to speak from the audience, this matter was turned back to the Planning Commission for discussion. The Public Hearing was then closed at 8:40 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to approve 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2 as presented in the staff report. Motion failed for lack of majority with the following roll call vote as follows: AYES: Commissioners Tapp and Medina. NOES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. The Planning Director was then directed by Commission to reconsider the city -wide density and if there are other zones that would be more com- patible with the R -3 zone, then set it for the next meeting. Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 3 AYES Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. Item No. 5 Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 and Conditional Use Permit 84 -CUP -2 (Cherry Valley Acres) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in its entirety in- cluding the Conditions of Approval by the Engineering Department. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Planning Commission stating that as one of the Conditions of Approval that every tract should pro- vide for the creation of the lighting and landscaping. Mr. Stephen Pleasant, CM Engineering, 226 E. Airport Dr., San Bernardino, representing Mr. Roy Kulikov, informed Commission that Item No. 4 in the Conditions takes care of the lighting and landscaping and that they were in agreement with this condition. He informed the Commission that he had talked with the Flood Control District and it was his understand- ing that Item No. 1 would be revised in the letter from Flood Control. Further, the Engineering Condition No. 10, if not revised would kill the project. Mr. Pleasant also discussed the issue with regard to Orange Street and its General Plan alignment as shown on the Circulation Element. Acting Chairman Thompson informed Mr. Pleasant that he believed the Planning Commission approved the General Plan Circulation Element which took care of Orange Street approximately 2 years ago, believing it to be Resolution PC 1982 -3 which has never been approved by the City Council. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, informed Commission that he remembered specifically that the City Council dealt with the subject of the street element. Mr. Stephen Pleasant, CM Engineering, again addressed the Commission informing them that they were in agreement with all of the conditions except No. 10 in the Engineering Conditions which would require improve- ments without any help from adjacent property owners. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission informing them that he felt there was some way this could be approached without placing the whole burden of improvements just on this project. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Remy, to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 and the Conditional Use Permit 84 -CUP -2 revising Item No. 10 under the Engineering Conditions of Approval as follows: No. 10 The developer shall deposit with the City an amount to be allocated by the City Engineer as pro rata fair share of the cost of the construction of Marshal Creek Channel crossing of Cougar land pro -rated to each de- velopmental phase. All four properties cornering in the area of the crossing shall be included in this Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 4 Commission recessed at 10:02 P.M. for 5 minutes. Commission meeting resumed at 10:07 P.M. The record should show that Commissioner Remy was excused at 10:10 P.M. Item No. 6 Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Installation of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks - Amendment to Ordinance 490. Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in this matter and read Exhibit "A ". Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of the City Council, addressed Commission stating that he feels a covenant should be set up that runs with the land. On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to recommend that the City Council adopt a negative declaration and fur- ther that City Council adopt the ordinance amendment as proposed. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Remy. Item No. 7 General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3 and Pre- Annexation and Zone Change 84 -RZ -2 Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in its entirety. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:40 P.M. Those Speaking in Opposition were: Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of the City Council, feels more ground work should be done and current action is not in compliance with the General Plan. Those Speaking in Favor, Commenting or Inquiring were: Mr. Frank Anderson, Martin Lane, wanted to know what effect this action would have on his property. Ms. Edith Wieman, 10661 Martin Lane, was concerned as to what kind of commercial activity would result from this action. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission informing them that the County has not changed any zoning in Cherry Valley since 1972. Mr. Gary Gitz, President of Far West Developers, 16168 Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach, Ca. Mr. Gitz suggested that the small triangular Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 5 On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, a re- commendation was made to the City Council that they adopt the negative declaration and to further recommend that City Council approve the General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3, designating the proposed area'Re- sidential Planned Unit Development and further that City Council approve the Pre- Annexation Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -2 from County W -2 and C -P to City R -T and C -2. Motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Shaw. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Remy. Item No. 8 Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3 (City intitiated) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report which was reviewed by the Commission with questions being answered by the Planner. On motion by Commissioner Schuelke, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, a recommendation to City Council was made that they adopt a negative de- claration and further recommended that they approve Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3. Motion carried - no dissention. Item No. 9 General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -4 (Circulation Element) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report prepared by the City Engineer. Acting Chairman Thompson suggested this item be continued and be placed first on the next agenda meeting of August 21, 1984. Commission concurred. Acting Chairman Thompson requests That the City initiate and if possible recommend to City Council that abatement proceedings be initiated against 790 Michigan and 493 Minnesota. Inspection of Beaumont Swap Meet for Compliance with Planning Commission Conditions This property was inspected by the Building Inspector and the Planning Director and it was found that substantial compliance with all conditions had been met with the possible exception of Condition 14.62 which re- quires compliance with handicapped restroom facilities and 14.60 which requires positive physical disconnection of the electrical boxes at the base of the light standards. These two conditions were unable to be verified since the restroom facilities are purportedly in the office and was locked up and the electrical boxes could not be checked since they were heavily taped up. No action was taken by the Planning Commission. There being no further business before the Planning Commission the Opened: 7:07 P.M. Acting Chairman Thompson presiding. Commissioners prsent: Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, Thompson Chairman Berg excused. Minutes approved as submitted. An Appeal of Curb and Gutter Improvements for 80 California' Avenue (Manzanares 84 -SP -5) The Planning Director presented the request, background, analysis and recommendation in this case. He informed the Commission that there was another item on the agenda that might have a bearing on this case and that being Item No. 6 Zoning Ordinace Amendment Regarding the Installa- tion of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks (Amendment to Ord. 490) which involves a suggested change to the zoning ordinance which may help to improve the situation for the Manzanares case. Recommendation made in view of the possible code amendment Item #6 on the agenda. New Planner Mr. Larson was introduced to the Planning Commission. Mr. Ruben Manzanares - 815 Edgar (father is owner of project) and stated that they are ready to comply with city. Originally they had the approval of the city and made plans for delivery of the trailer. Most of the parcels developed there have no curb and gutter and the street itself - there is some sort of controversary going on with Caltrans whether or not they are going to improve the road because of the traffic conjestion they have the overpass right through Beaumont Avenue and the Freeway nad this might have something to do in the future if this road gets improved how much more of a fee might be imposed on them to upgrade that distance between the curb and whatever they decide to do. Footage regarding curb and gutter is 207.431. Is willing to improve the curb and gutter at a future date whenever the other properties came in and developed or whether the city at point and time felt the need -to have the curb and gutter in at that point and time. (agreement) If delivery on the trailer is made within the next few days and this matter is not resolved how would it be handled. Commission explained that it would not affect Commissioners discussed this matter in detail considering Item #6 per- taining to Curbs and Gutters on the agenda. Motion was made by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Tapp to deny this appeal and refer this matter to City Council with the follow- ing vote: Mr. Irish Mitchell, member of City Council - stated that Item #6 would completely negate the denial-of this appeal and he would appreciate lf- aaelke�- glees- e- eealee�ag if you did not throw another piece of partically controversarial issue into the city council prior to deter- mining what you're going to do with Item No. 6. If you can determine what was done with Item No. 6 then set this over to have a reasonably decision on what you will do with this after you know what you will do with No. 6. The cart is before the horse. No. 6 should be heard first and - make- a- puling and determined before you make a ruling on this gentle- man over here because if you make a ruliing one way here, ruling the other way what good is the first ruling. Motion was made by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Tapp to deny this appeal and refer this matter to City Council with the follow- ing vote: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, Thompson. NOES: No ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. supposition Commissioners discussed and decided that Mr. Mitchell's suggestion is based that the new ordinance will be changed or will be approved and this is unknown, therefore it must be based on the current ordinance that is inhouse right now and approved "490" which is in effect right204.38 now. Mr. Manzanares's appeal is based on this ordinance. Once the ordinance has been changed then Mr. Manzanares appeal will become mute ,r/ Manzanares was informed thtt his next step is to file his appeal with the City C until (Clerk).Can go ahead and continue the construction. w� � then . and / the maximum Item No. 3 General Plan Jh1story, ndment No. 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2 Planning Direr explained that this matter was a City initiated and then presentehe request, environmental status, general plan, zoning and landuse, plan designations, findings and recommendation in these two ndments. Explained that o, 1, 5 & 8 will be replaced to read "up tState law requires cities to designate the proposed general distribution and general location extent of the use of land for housing and if we did not identify where and when this new general plan designation is to apply we would not meet the intent of the law. Thus, the reason why you have the second general plan amendment if we do create this new density which would permit up to 32 units per acre, then we are obligued to apply it to a specific area of the city - has to be applied some where in order to meet the intent of planning law. By expanding the general plan density but not increasing their maximum ranges you permit greater flexibility. To effectively administer would require an amendment of the zoning ordinance which can be done as the city sees fit. If adopted by the City Council it would read: © 1. Rural residential - up to 2 units per acre; 2. Low Density residential - up to 5 units per acre, 3. Low Medium Density residential - up to 8 units per acre, 4. Medium Density residential - up to 16 units per acre, 5. High Density residential - up to 32 units per acre. Designate an area of the community high density residential up to 32 units an acre. The area selected for this density is 12.2 acreas between 7th street and 11th street and erange- magnolia and orange and then apply it to that area PUBLIC HEARING opened at 7:58 P.M. Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of City Council - choice of location for the heavy density is completely unrealistic unless of course there is some particular group or groups that have a couple of lots right together that are ready to consoludate and it was put in specifically for their purpose . One block on orange which is included in this that has the finest homes in the City of Beaumont. Should not other areas be named for high density that are also in the R -3 category. Other areas should also be designated - thinks this is the poorest area for that heavy concentration that he has every heard of. Beaumont is not a city that is seeking high density, close net quarters, potential slums in site of 20 or 25 years - Imest -59% over 50% of the land in Baumont today is not developed. Major objection - that this the City of Beaumont, the general public are not seeking future slums. (proven it many times) Mr. Gary Cotes, resides between 9th & 10th on Magnolia - wanted to n EE-out regulations, living space per body - follow regualtions as far as square foot per person. Personally for this - wanted to clarify. Planning Director explained that if the 32 units per acrea was adopted and designated an area being that (GP designation) the zoning code would not permit that many - you still have to maintain under the zoinng code 2000 sq. feet per unit so if this was adopted there would hve to be an amendment to the zoning code to incdrease the height limit and make some other provision for parking or designate that it could not be on small lots you would have to have a minimum of say 30,000 feet or more in order to be suee that you had your open areas and your parking. Zoing code is the key - new provision would have to be adopted. Mr. Ear, Wood1, 555 E. 8th St., object5to change of the ordinance few -32 i tos many. - doesn't trust politicians. FAVOR: Mr. Bernie Fagot - wants to understand. 0 Norman Davis, City Manager wanted to help Mr. Fagot out since he knew wFiat a was to ing about. R -3 lots can only get 2 units in all cases Citizens not understood. This is an attempt waht formally existed in the City. First step to conform to the state law that mandates that when you create a new general plan classification that you have to create some zoning application of it. Otherwise you can have it set aside. For you to get what you really want you are going to have to come back here at another time when it applies consistency zoning to the tplan. In this case it would still take another GP amendment to change from medium density to high densityy. This is an attempt to correct a situation that this cit wss placed in by reason of the action irAthe adovtion of the General P an. Mr. Jack Smith - a general observation relative to this subject. He is a building, and developer. Not able to locate the land that had the sufficient denisty that was xgxx ecanumable feasible to develop . Point that he is making thinks this would be a good move land not zoned to a high enough density to make it viable. General statement. Be a worthwhile move. Kenneth Fa of - 435 Sherry Court, Beaumont - t iie favors the increase, however, he does not feel that the sphere of influence is large enough just a little section, should cover a greater area - not covering a big enough area. Mr. Gary Coty - when he purchased his property he was under the assumption that it was R -3 and then the density factor said no way. thinks its a good move - laws where you can't over build. Mr. Irish Mitchell - specific point was the 32 units and, hat is more that as every been built in this area. We have enough and that we do not have to crowd this up ad make it another jungle like they did in Sunneymead. Thinks there should be more designated plan areas4 l Allow Planning Director to take a look at some of th6se areas then you spread your apartments in the areas where they should be where there is a need. Take other areas. 32 is basically too light. &�& rj Consider other areas - upgrading in an area where there is not a vacant lot. Norm Davis, clsoe hearing before hearing. Commissioners should not be 1� talking and expressing views if the public hearing is still open. No input in advance of closing a hearing - then you're treading on thin ice. Another comment as regards to this whole issue - fully supports it, feels it is important for the city. Hope that for the benefit of the city that you move ahead and adopt what you hve here tonight, this will open it up for you to do something more than you've been able to do in the past. If you try to expand it tonight that you are again you cannot adopt a negative declaration tonight because no other area has been studied. Procedd and then direct your staff to do something else. This is the tool that you need to work with in the future. Mr. Mitchell - suggestion to adjourn the hearing and have a special meeting next week — full staff - do not believe that it would take 3 or 4 people more than 3 or 4 days what -ethep -apex to determine what other areas could be included in this all at one time. If you wuld just adjourn the public hearing to some meeting next week or to the benefit of the planning director to allow him to get aquainted with this and maybe you could get something done all at one time and not be coming back every 3 or 4 weeks. Mr. Davis - suggest in order to consider something else you hve to advertise it - so you eihter kill this one outright and go back and readvertise a whole new situation or you adopt this and study it and come back with a recommendation or do whatever you want or direct it tonight if you want. Mr. Mitchell - doesn't believe that after 3 and J years that expediencey 10 days or 20 or 30 days would be detritmental to the city. Wish you would give it consideration. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:40 P.m. Norm Davis - again it is important that you adopt thetool - if you want to cut it down to the R -3 go ahead. time for us as a city to start doing things instead of delaying - applause from some members of the audience - cannot do it right the first time. Get rid of this designation which is crippling this community. Making a strong plea cause it is important. � /�jj. Mr. Davis - you could cut the size of this one down but you cannot expand it because you have not given notice to the people. Fist step may take so lone encomsassing that it takes so long to get it done that you don't really get anything done 0 Discussion by commissioners Mr. Mitchell - brought out quite clearly until such time as the conditions for stbacks open sapace, recreational areas are modified this cannot go into effect and in the area athat you are there may be one or two vacant lots by the time they went through any at all process application it would take 6 to 12 weeks and so this would not delay but it would put it all together in one package. Consolidate meeting. Planning Director informed commission that if you want to continue the public hearing and then renotice then we would put the notice in the newspaper and have a staff report done by that time and we could hear it at the next meeting. After much discussion the commission voted as follows: Motion was made by Commissioner Medina, seconded by commissionerTapp to approve 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2 as presented in staff report. The vote is as follows: AYES: Commissioners Tapp, and Medina. NOES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Schuelke and Thompson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT. Chairman Berg. Norm Davis - you have no alternative now the issue is dead. Can not be continued. Planner - I think the action is still before you = you have to take an action to disapprove it in order to kill it. Planner Director was directed to reconsider the city -wide and if there are other zones that would be more compatible with the R -3 then set it for the agenda the next time. Negative Declaration Mini- Storage Facility (J. T. Smith 84 -SP -7) Sq Planning Director Larson presented the analysis and recommendation \` in this matter. Motion was made by Commissioner Schuelke, seconded by Commissioner Remy to recommend to the City Council that they adopt the negative declaration. Motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 - and CUP 84 -CUP -2 (Cherry Valley Acres) Planning Director presented the environmental status, general plan, zoning and land use, history, analysis and recommendation in ythis matter. Informed commission that at the last minute we did get the fire dept. conditions, the engineer's conditions, however, we do not have the Flood Control eendibiens- el- apgpeval.requirements. Norm Davis - consider one other item t� ntative policy here before the commission - thought you had agreed - unofficial policy - every tract would provide for the creation for the lighting and landscaping I (as one of the conditon) district set up by the developer - reason h we wanted to go this route is that the developer as being the original��j landowner could do it with this his own decision making power - once all the people all are in then it becomes a hassel to get 50% of them to agree. By doing it this way then we have that ability to pay for street lights, any extras . Provision placed in there. Steve Pleasant, CM Engineering, 225 E. Airport Dr., San Bernardino representing Roy Kulikov from CM Engineers CV Acres. Responding to �P Mr. Davis' recommendation, I believe if you look in your conditions as reeemmeadatieas recommended by your city engineer item No. 4 thats already mentioned and we're totally in agreeent with that. Last minute conditions by engineer, I was totally blown out of the water by what the comments were. I do and I will address two main points 1) flood control requirements and 2) issue with regard to Orange street and its general plan alignment as its shown on your circulation element. first the letter from flood control - if I may give you a brief one or tow history on this. Main comment of 7 conditions number 1 that they ask for which is - a box culvert capable of passing one -half of the Marshall Creek design discharge of 2,580 cis should be constructed across Cougar Way. This conditions will be dropped. Full improvements would cost $100,000 which would kill the project. Mr. Pleasnat ask if there were any questions. Commissioner Thompson stated he believed that the Planning Commission approved the General Plan Circulation Element which took car of Orange Street approximately 2 years ago and it never has been sent to City Council - dealth with Orange Street. Resolution No. PC 1982 -3 never has been approved by City Council. NORM - remembers specifically that the Council dealt with the subject of the street element - how they reduced the width on Beaumont Ave., I cannot conceive how they did not take care of the hole ball of wax. Commissioner Thompson 1/20/1982 Mr. Pleasant stated that they are in agreement with all of the conditions except on the engineer's conditions item No. 10 which requires improvements without any help from adjacent property owners. Can't live with this. NORM - traffic burden totally on this project - wisom in place in x dollars - some basis alloeated that this could be approached - doesn't A put the whole burden on his back, yet gives him a fair share of the cost to bear as you make this approvement. equitable way to share the burden. STEVE - what is a fair assessment - as revised by the County Flood Control District. Motion was made by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Remy to approve tentative tract map No. 20011 and the Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -CUP -2 deleting Item No. 10 under the Engineer's Conditions of Approval which reads: A box culvert and providing full m be designed and constructed across ments shall be constructed within in easements may be required as ap and shall be designed to protect t reduce velocity downstream. All i. to approval by the City STEVE - the area designated a only per approved plans Flood Control District. of all parties. ter plan capacity shall o ar Way. Channel improve - e development. Transitions ved by the City Engineer box culvert upstream and ovements will be subject Engineer �nd lood Control. s a flood haze d area shall be developed by the City En ineer and the County Message not o'ng along - best interest NORM: suggests - the develper shall deposit with the City an amount to be allocated by the City Engineer as ppo rata fair share of the cost of the construction of Marshal Creek channel crossing of Courgar Lane pro -rated to each developmental phase.. This could be worked out with the Flood Control and City nginner - -to include the four corners of perty abutting the Marshal Creek crossing. Commissioners felt that the note item No. 11 the street on the eastern boundary will be a continuation of Orange Avenue AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, and / Acting Chairman Thompson NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. Condition refers to the updated letter from Flood Control. RECESS Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Installation of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks - Amendment to Ordinance 490. Planner Director Larson presented the environmental status, background and recommendation in this matter and further read Exhibit "A" to Commission. The record should show that Commissioner Remy was excused at 10:10 P.M. Mr. Mitchell - feels a covenant should be set up that runs with the landing up cash money is a bad thing - if subdivided the covenant follows the land and is all pro- rated. Motion was made by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to recommend that City Council adopt a negative declaration and further that they adopt the ordinance amendment as proposed. Motion carried with the following vote AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Remy General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3 and Pre- Annexation and Zone Change 84 -RZ -2 Planner Director presented the report in its entirety. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10:40 P.M. Mr. Frank Anderson, Martin Lane, behind the 147 acres. Wanted to know what effect it would have on his property. Edith Weeman , 10661 Mountain Lane was conscerned as to what kind of commercia would go in. Mr. Mitchell - point that is adverse going to face. Stated that last year there were hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. During the meetings the Cherry Valley grouph finally got past unamimous of anything beyond Brookside would not be allowed to have any development other than 1 acre or more lots. It was passed in its in records of all those he rings. Called toy attention. Feels the Cherry Valley group will prob bly be down in a mass number on Monday at the hearing they will have representatives from the County in all probably and all kinds of documentation. More ground work should be done. Have not shown that this is in line with the General Plan. No study of this area. Ties into the entire annexation. Mr. Gary Gitz, President of Far West Developers, 16168 Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach, Ca. Wanted to answers - wanted to come into the city to get facilities available. Explained that what would probably be proposed starting on Brookside small parcel it might make since to have a 7 -11 or something like that (triangle area) the 3.1 acre at the other corner directly across Beaumont Avenue that would be a very small strip commercial with just a couple of stores, the type of commercial you would be looking at would be Stop and Shop, convenient center this king of thing - up above south of Cherry Valley Blvd., intersection of Beaumont and Cherry Valley that entire commercial parcel is 10.6 acres we put that in because I think that commercial eventually will be viable in that area, this would be a neightborhood shopping center - hardware store, Alpha Bet, drugstore, that kind of thing. Approx. 15 acres total. 10:55 Motion was made by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp recommending the City Councl adopt a negative declaration, to recommend 0 that City Council approval General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3, de- signating the proposed area Residential Planned Unit Development, and to also recommedn to the City Council that they approve the Pre - Annexation Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -2 from County W -2 and C -P to City R -T and C -2 NORM: - addressed the commission and stated that the County has not changed any zoning in Cherry Valley. The zoning that is on CV has been in place in CV since 1972. They have reemphazed their desire Mr. Davis hates to think that we're going to set in our shell AYES: Commissioner Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Shaw. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Remy. Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3 (City- initiated) Planning Director presented the staff report in its entirety. Questions were asked by Commissioners and answered by Planning Director (Poppy Trailer Park essentially stays the way it is until eventually its phased out. ) Any business will be in performance with the zoning ordinance. Motion was made by Commissioner Schuelke, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to recommend to City Council that they adopt a negative declaration and further recommend that they approve Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3. Motion carried - no dissention. General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -4 (Circulation Element) Planning Director presented the staff report which was prepared by the City Engineer. Acting Chairman Thompson suggested that this item be tabled and placed on the next agenda of August 21, 1984. So moved. Wanted to know if the Circulation Element could be found (1st item) on agenda. Swap Meet: Acting Chairman Thompson would like to have the City initiate and if possible recommend to CC that abatement proceeding be initiated against on 790 Michigan and 493 Minnosota have the building inspector check them out. SWAP MEET: Planner Director Larson informed Commission that the City Building Inspector and himself inspected this property and found substantial compliance with all conditions except of Condition 14.62 which requires compliance with handicapped restroom facilities and 14.60 which requires positive physical disconnection of the electrical boxes at the basis of their light. Unable to verify these conditions since the restroom facilities are reportedly in the office and locked up and we could not test the electrical boxes because they were heavily tapped up. Planning items appeared to be in order. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:15 P.M. I BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 7, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, August 7, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Acting Chairman Thompson presiding: 1. Call to Order at 7:07 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. On Roll Call the following Commissioners were present: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. Chairman Berg was excused. 4. Planning Director, Ronald L. Larson was introduced to Commissioners. Item No. 1 The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 17, 1984 was approved as submitted. Item No. 2 An Appeal of Curb and Gutter Improvements for 80 California Avenue (Manzanares 84 -SP -5) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report concerning the applicanft appeal and informed the Commission that Item #6 on the agenda (Zoning Ord. Amendment regarding the Installation of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks - Amend- ment to Ordinance 490) which involves a suggested change to the zoning ordinance might have a bearing on this applicant's case` f „_� Mr. Ruben Manzanares (son of the owner of the proper ) $�5 Edgar, informec the Commission that they will comply with the City$ ling to'improve the curb and gutter at a future date whenever the oAer properties are de- veloped,orif the city at some point and time feels the need to have the curt and gutter put in, then they are willing to enter into an agreement with the city on this matter. Had concern about Caltrans as to whether or not they were going to improve the road. Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of City Cduncil, felt this It pm houl be sett o�ve� u til a de ision is ade on Itepi,.V , ems,- �ZW A - �' '^^,e4A On m ti on by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the Commissic voted to approve the denial as recommended by the Planning Director and re- fer this applicant to the City!Council with the following roll calfl_n AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. tem No. General Plan Amendment 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2 Planning Director Larson pr e9ted the staff report, giving the Commission the background info rmat iontY necessity of these amendments. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:58 P.M. Those speaking in Opposition were:;, y �,�,G, Mr. Irish M' cchell, Member of tie ity Council/ addressed the Planning Com- mission o 5 different occasions His feelings were: the choice of locatic for the avy density is comple ly unrealistic; other areas should be con - sidere give the Planning Director time to become acquainted with this area wishes Fonsider�4ion; would like to see further study and it all be put N Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 2 together in a package. Mr. Earl Woodley, 555 E. 8th St., objects to 32 units /acre - thinks its too many - doesn't trust politicians. Those speaking in Favor: Mr. Gary Coty, resides between 9th and 10th on Magnolia - wanting to know about the regulations; thinks the increase is a good move. Mr. Bernie Fagot, P. 0. Box 1085, Cherry Valley, wanted to understand the General Plan Amendments better. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission on 4 different occasions pertaining to this issue informing the Commission that: this proposal is an attempt to correct a situation that this city was placed in by reason of the action of the adoption of the General Plan; feels that for the benefit of the city, you should move ahead and adopt what you have here tonight - this is the tool that you noell to�ro k with in the future; in order to consider s.:.._- *Q'V tm�t ev rtise {7fE 4t; feels it is time for the city to start doing hi gs instead of delaying P4"—is making a strong plea because it is important. Y, Mr. Jack Smith, a general contractor, thinks this would be a good move, that land here in the city is not zoned to a high enough density to make it viable. Mr. Kenneth Fagot, 435 Sheri Court, favors the increase, however, he does not feel that the sphere of influence is large enough. There being no one else wishing to speak from the audience, this matter was turned back to the Planning Commission for discussion. Public Hearing was then closed at 8:40 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to approve 84 -GP -1 and 84 -GP -2 as presented in the staff report. The motion failed for lack of majority with the following roll call as follows: AYES: Commissioners Tapp and Medina. NOES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. The Planning Director was then directed by Commission to reconsider the city -wide density and if there are other zones that would be more com- patible with the R -3 zone then set it for the next meeting. Item No. 4 Negative Declaration - Mini - Storeage Facility (J. T. Smith 84 -SP -7) Planning Director Larson present the staff report which was discussed and review by Commission. On motion by Commissioner Schuelke, seconded by Commissioner Remy, re- commendation was made to the City Council that they adopt the negative declaration. Motion carried with the following roll'call: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. Item No. 5 Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 and Conditional Use Permit 84 -CUP -2 (Cherry Valley Acres) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in its entirety includ- ing the Conditions of Approval by the Engineering Department. Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 3 Mr. Norm Davis, City ) ' r, addressed the Planning Commission stating that he thought that every tract should provide for the creation of the lighting and andscaping -crap- eeudx4a3' ,ve LQjiC2r:'• Crn.c;_ ..i t. �fi�7 ✓g J -G?' iLt" Mr. Stephen Pleasant, CM Engineering, 226 E. Airport Dr., San Bernardino, representing Mr. Roy Kulikov informed Commission that Item No. 4 in the Conditions takes care of the lighting and landscaping and that they were in agreement with this condition. He informed the Commission that he had talked with the Flood Control District and it was his understanding that the letter dated 1/20/84 Item No. 1 would be revised. Also, the Engineer's Conditions No. 10 if not revised would kill the project. Mr. Pleasant further discussed the issue with regard to Orange Street and its General Plan alignment as shown on the Circulation Element. Acting Chairman Thompson informed Mr. Pleasant that he believed the Planning Commission approved the General Plan Circulation Element which took care of Orange Street approximately 2 years ago, believing it to be Resolution PC 1982 -3 which has never been approved by the City Council. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, informed Commission that he remembers specifically that the Council dealt with the subject of the street element. Mr. Stephen Pleasant, CM Engineering, again addressed the Commission in- forming them that they were in agreement with all of the conditions except No. 10 in the Engineering Conditions which would require improvements without any help from adjacent property owners. Mr. Norm Davis, City Engineer, addressed the Commission informing them that he felt there was some way this could be approached without placing the whole burden of improvements just on this project. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Remy that Commission approve Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 and the Conditional Use Permit No. 84 -CUP -2 revising Item No. to under the Engineer's Conditions of Approval as follows: No. 10 The developer shall deposit with the City an amount to be allocated by the City Engineer as pro rata fair share of the cost of the construction of Marshal Creek Channel crossing of Cougar land pro -rated to each developmental phase. All four properties cornering in the area of the crossing shall be included in this development procedure. All improvements will be subject to approval by the City Engineer and the Flood Control District. The note on page 2 of the Engineering Conditions was agreed by the lommission that the street on the eastern boundary will be a continuation of orange street. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg. Commission Recessed at 10:02 P.M. for 5 minutes. Commission Meeting Resumed at 10:07 P.M. The record should show that commissioner Remy was excused at 10:10 P.M. Item No. 6 Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding Installation of Curb, Gutter and Sidewalks` Amendment to Ordinance 490. Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in this matter and read Exhibit "A" to Commission. Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 4 Mr. Irish Mitchell, Member of City Council, addressed Commission stating that he feels a covenant should be set up that runs with the land. On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, to re- commend that the City Council adopt a negative declaration and further that City Council adopt the ordinance amendment as proposed. Motion carried with the following roll call: AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Schuelke and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg.''ti+- �.�t/Jc�� Item No. 7 N General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3 and Pre- Annexation and Zone Change 84 -RZ -2 Planning Director Larson presented the staff report in its entirety. The Public Hearing was opened at 10:40 P.M. Those speaking in Opposition were: Mr. Irish Nitchell, Mem mr be done _ Those speaking in Favor Mr. Frank Anderson, Martin have on his property. of� Counci , feels more ground work shou d Lane, - wanted to know what effect this] Ms. Edith Wieman 10661 Mar in Lane, was c ncerned s to wha kind of commercial�� Norm Davis City Manager, addressed the Commission informing them Mr. No y g , that the County has not changed any zoning in Cherry Valley since 1972. Mr. Gary Gitz, Preside Z F that Developers, 1616y� Blvd., Huntington Bele �/ that the small triang a on Brookside might b t 3.1 acres at the other co a �ion y across Beaumont Aven e a small strip of commer �}} couple of stores; up above th of Cherry Valley Blvd° T11 erse Beaumont land Cherry Valley e entire commercial parcel hich is about 10.6 acres woul �a�[jd be a neighborhood shopping center, such as a hardware store, Alpha "'"'""'""((Beta, drugstore, etc. There being no one else wishing to speak from the audience, this matter was then turned back to the Commission for discussion with the public hearing closing at 10:55 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Medina, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, a re- commendation was made to the City Council that they adopt the negative declaration and to further recommend that City Council approve the General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -3, designating the proposed area Residential Planned Unit Development and further that City Council approve the Pre - Annexation Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -2 from County W -2 and C -P to City R -T and C -2. Motion carried with the following roll call: AYES: Commissioner Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, and Acting Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Shaw. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Remy. Item No. 8 Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -3 (City Initiated) Planning Director Larson presented the staff/ was reviewed by the Commission with questions being answered by Planner. Planning Commission Meeting of August 7, 1984 Page 4 Item No. 9 General Plan Amendment No. 84 -GP -4 (Circulation Element) Planning Director Larson presented the staff report prepared by the City Engineer. Acting Chairman Thompson suggested this item be continued and be placed first on the next meeting of August 21, 1984. Commission concurred. Acting Chairman Thompson requests: That the City initiate and if possible recommend to City Council that abatement proceedings be initiated against 790 Michigan and 493 Minnesota. Inspection of Beaumont Swap Meet for Compliance with Planning Commission Conditions This property was inspected by the Building Inspector and the Planning Director and it was found that substantial compliance with all conditions had been met with the possible exception of Condition 14.62 which requires compliance with handicapped restroom facilities and 14.60 which requires positive physical disconnection of the electrical boxes at the base of the light standards. These two conditions were unable to be verified since the restroom facilities are purportedly in the office and was locked up and the electrical boxes could not be checked since they were heavily up. No action was taken by the Planning Commission. 45� There being no further business before the Planning Commission the meeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M. Planning Commission Secretary CA_� BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 17, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, July 17, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Chairman Berg pre- siding. 1. Call to Order at 7:06 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. The following Commissioners were Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, Thompson Remy was excused. Item No. 1 present: Commissioners Shaw, and Chairman Berg. Commissioner The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of July 17, 1984 was approved with the following amended item: Item No. 4 - Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -1 (Westinghouse) Under NOES - Commissioner Shaw's name should be added. NEW ITEMS Item No. Determination of Use 84 -2 - Mini - Storage Facilities the Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented /background, analysis and recommendation in this matter. On a motion made by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Schuelke, the Planning Commission accepted staff's initiation of the Determination of Use to establish mini- storage facilities as a per- mitted use in the C -2 zone (not including the storage of fuel or flammable liquids) based upon the aforementioned findings. Motion carried with the following vote: AYES Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None. ABSTAIN:None ABSENT: Commissioner Remy INFORMATIONAL ITEMS General Plan Amendment to Increase Densities in the City Interim Planning Director Morrissey informed Commission that per request, staff had prepared two (2) general plan amendments. 1) will modify the existing general plan density ranges and add a density cate- gory; and 2) will apply the new category (up to 32 units /acre) to a specific area of the city. The hearing for these two amendments will be held August 7, 1984 and that all property owners within 300' will be notified by mail. Also, the hearing will be advertised in the Record Gazette Newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. This informational item was given to the Commissioners in order for them to have time to consider the amendments before the hearing. Conditional Use Permit 80 -CUP 76 - Swap Meet Interim Planning Director Morrissey informed Commission that this item would be placed on the Agenda for the meeting of August 7, 1984 in order to consider possible revocation of the CUP for failure to comply with their conditions. -1- Beaumont Planning Commission Minutes of July 17, 1984 Page 2 Mr. Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission and stated that the owners of the Swap Meet was notified on this day (7/17/84) that they would be called before the Planning Commission's Meeting on 8/7/84 for failing to comply with the conditions. A Planning Director has been hired and will commence working as of 7/30/84. Since this was Jim Morrissey, the Interim Planning Director's last Planning Comission Meeting, Mr. Davis, City Manager, expressed appreciation and gratitude as well as the Commissioners to Jim for an outstanding job. Requests by Commissioner Thompson and if needed That the City Council investigate /mmA initiate condemnation pro- ceedings on the Giant Station which borders 6th and Massachusettes Streets. The tanks are still in the ground and the station has been abandoned for over a year. That the City Council have thelicense control officer request that the residents at 889 Euclid clean up their yard since their property is to the point that it is affecting the monetary return on neighboring properties. This kind of situation is considered a nuisance. On a motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, this item was approved to forward these two requests to the City Council for action. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Schuelke, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None. ABSTAIN:None ABSENT: Commissioner Remy There being no further matters before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:42 P.M. Sincerely, Planning Commission Secretary BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 3, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tues- day, July 3, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Chairman Berg presiding: 1. Call to Order at 7:07 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. The following Commissioners were present: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Thompson, Tapp and Chairman Berg. The record should show however, that Commissioner Tapp arrived late. Those absent were Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. Item 1 The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 1984 were approved as submitted. Item 2 Westinghouse Development Plan - 84 -DP -3 (Northwest of the Intersection of 2nd Street & Highland Spgs. Rd.) Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff report, project description, background and Conditions of Approval in this matter. Those speaking from the audience were: Mr. Jack Bastin, Manager - Western Service Center for Westinghouse. Mr. Bastin gave information to the Commission pertaining to storage, materials that is called "suggested waste ", etc. He then ask Mr. Lee Smith to answer the questions of the Commission. Mr. Lee Smith, Radiation Safety Officer, Western Service Center for Westinghouse. Mr. Smith explained in detail the method of how the three (3) con- taminates namely solid waste, liquid waste., and air affluence would be handled. However, he informed the Commission to keep in mind that Westinghouse is licensed by the State of California and that the State sets the discharge limits that have to be maintained and also the State can come in at any time and look at their records. Interim Planning Director Morrissey informed Commission that the Regional Water Quality Control Board would be continuously check- ing the discharge water and that the City of Beaumont is responsible for supplying the Regional Water Quality Control Board with this information on a monthly basis. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission pertaining to No. E. OTHER - under the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Davis feels that the City cannot afford to bear the expense of any more lights and would hope that this item would be deleted from the Conditions of Approval. On a motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the Planning Commission approved Westinghouse Development Plan 84 -DP -3 with the following additions and deletion: Beaumont Planning Commission Minutes of July 3, 1954 Page 2 ADDITIONS: No. 12 - Under Conditions of Approval Two (2) Westinghouse logo's are approved as proposed on submitted elevations. No. 13 - To comply with all federal, state and local regulations regarding hazardous waste materials. DELETION: No. 2 - Under E OTHER which reads: "A street light shall be installed at Highland Springs Road and 2nd Street, with plan approved by City Engineer and Edison " shall be deleted. AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Remy, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: Commissioner Shaw. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. Item 3 Continued Public Hearing - Tentative Tract Map No. 20011 (Cherry Valley Acres) Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff report, pro- ject description and background in this matter. The public hearing was opened at 7:41 P.M., by Chairman Berg and those speaking from the audience were: Mr. Stephen Pleasant, CM Engineering Assoc. Mr. Pleasant feels that he and staff are in concurrence with both ordinances. He hopes that the ordinances will be changed to allow flexibility. The staff report containing the project description, background and report was reviewed by the Commission with questions being answered by the Planner. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by the Planning Commission recommended this matter them to pass an Urgency Ordinance for insertion permit condominium developments as a Conditiona vide for flexibility in development standards. proposed amendment is as follows: Commissioner Remy, to City Council for of an amendment to 1 Use Permit to pro - The wording of the Condominium developments, in order to provide for variation in required zoning standards and permit innovative design. All projects submitted under this provision shall include detailed site plans and be processed simultaneously with a subdivision map. Both shall be reviewed for conformance with the following provisions: A. Meets the intent of R -3 Zone; B. Meets the Zoning Ordinance provisions of the Con- ditional Use Permit; C. Provides adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation; D. Provides adequate separation between buildings for light and air; E. Provides adequate and appropriately located open space and recreational areas which are accessible to all living units; Beaumont Planning Commission Minutes of July 3, 1984 Page 3 F. Adequate maintenance provisions are required to ensure continued maintenance of all common areas; G. Proposed density and improvements are consistent with the General Plan. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Remy, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Remy, the Planning Commissioner recommended this matter to City Council for them to pass an Urgency Ordinance to change Ordinance 490, Section 105 pertaining to the method in which front yard setbacks are arrived at for new subdivisions. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Remy, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Remy, this hearing was continued to August 7, 1984, with the intent'that the City Council would adopt both Ordinance Amendments at their meeting of July 9, 1984. Item 4 Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -1 (Westinghouse) Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened at 8:05 P.M., and there being no one in the audience to speak, the public hearing was then closed at 8:06 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and approve the Zone Change No. 84 -RZ -1 sub- ject to the findings contained in the report. AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Remy, Thompson, and Chairman Berg. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. Item 5 Ordinance Regulating Mobilehomes Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff report. The public hearing was opened at 8:12 P.M., and there being no one in the audience to speak, the public hearing was then closed at 8:13 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Remy, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration and the Mobilehome Ordinance. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Tapp, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Commissioners Schuelke and Medina. Beaumont Planning Commission Minutes of July 3, 1984 Page 4 Item 6 - Not on Agenda Determination of Use 84 -1 - Gun Shops Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff report. The staff report containing the background and analysis as well as the recommendation was reviewed by the Commission with questions being answered by the Planner. On motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the Planning Commission voted to accept staff's initiation of the determination of use and to establish gun shops as a permitted use in the C -2 Zone, based upon the aforementioned report. There being no further Items before the Commission, the meetigg adjourned at 8:25 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Secretary BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, June 19, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Chairman Berg pre- siding. 1. Call to Order at 7:04 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. Let the record show the following Commissioners were present: Shaw, Tapp, Thompson, Medina, Remy and Chairman Berg. Commissioner Schuelke was excused. 4. The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 5, 1984 were approved; however, the amended Conditions of Approval for Seeburger - CUP 1005 were clarified as follows: No. 3(a) of the CUP #1005 should read: A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department prior to occupancy. It shall conform substantially to Exhibit "A" as amended. Also it shall attempt to use suitable plant materials which are water conserving. Fur- ther, any sloped or mounded area shall have ground covers which will prevent erosion. At least 85% of the landscaped area shall contain at least three (3) patio type trees. All landscaping areas shall be maintained in a viable growth condition. No. 3(b) of the CUP #1005 should read: The two (2) driveway aprons on Tenth Street shall be removed and replaced with new curb and gutter as shown on Exhibit "A ". No. 10 of the CUP #1005 should read: At the end of six months the applicant shall either make the off - site improvements immediately and complete them within ninety (90) days or the Conditional Use Permit shall be null and void. ITEM NOT ON AGENDA City Manager, Mr. Davis, addressed the Commission with a matter concern- ing density required by the General Plan for the City of Beaumont. Mr. Davis advocates for the Commission to seriously consider having a hear- ing to recommend isi�n�pp����'t�he density actor to 6 -16 on the IMedium and ((0 r on the `r_% informedLUommission that most other cities a� something corresponding to this amount. Further, that some of the people that purchased lots in the R -3 zone north of the commercial area a few years ago with the intent of being able to build, now find that after the General Plan came into being, their lot(s) can only have 2 units on it by reason of the density factor. He feels this is a pro- blem that needs immediate attention. A motion was made by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp to have a hearing as soon as possible to re- evaluate the density factor and that staff further bring a comparison of 4=a other cities concerning densities back to Commission. Motion carried. Item 2 Request for Review of Conditions (81 -DP -2) Plot Plan 1010 - Richard Whitman, Applicant Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented staff report. Beaumont Planning Department June 19, 1984 Page 2 The public hearing was opened at 7:35 P.M., by Chairman Berg and those speaking from the audience were: Mr. Richard Whitman, owner of Dick's VW, addressed the Commission and informed them that he had put in rock in place of a low ground cover. Mr. Norm Davis, City Manager, addressed the Commission saying as far as he was personally concerned rock was o.k. There being no further proponents or opponents the public hearing was closed at 7:45 P.M. On motion by Commissioner Shaw, seconded by Commissioner Remy, the Planning Commission approved the Final on 81 -DP -2 with No. 8 of the Conditions of Approval amended as follows: All landscaped areas shall be planted with suitable materials including the area along Euclid Avenue between the curb and sidewalk. Suitable materials shall include four shade trees, (minimum 15 gallons size) in the parking area along Euclid Avenue, and su ther low growing water conserving ground covers and /or OCK as approved by the Planning Department. All landscaped a eas shall be maintained in a viable and weed free condition. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Tapp, Medina, Remy, Thompson and Chairman Berg. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schuelke. Item 3 Tentative Tract Map 20011, CM Engineering Associates, Applicant Interim Planning Director Morrissey presented the staff repor roject description and background in this matter. He informed the Cission that the cul -de -sac lots in the upper portion of the subdivision as well as the R -3 lots were not large enough. Further, that the appli- cant (CM Engineering Assoc.) had submitted a continuance letter in the hope that some type of revision or recommendation of the Commission could aid the n permitting their map to be approved. Planner Morrissey also informed�%mmission that the letter received June 18, 1984 from CM Engineering, Assoc., indicated that a CUP could be used; however, it can not be used at this time, unless there is something in the Ordinance that says condominiums will be processed by Conditional Use Permits. Planner Morrissey made the following corrections in the staff report under FINDINGS and the SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL as follows: FTvnTNrC Number 2 - second paragraph, line 4 should read: "81 -83" in place of 70 -82. beginning of line 5 - delete "and 83 ". CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Number 10 - second paragraph should be deleted - "The CC &R's shall restrict occupancy to adults over age 55." Number 13 - first line - should be "lettered" not letters. Number 15 - second line delete "Department of" Beaumont Planning Commission June 19, 1984 Page 3 The public hearing was opened by Chairman Berg at 8:01 P.M., and the record should show that there was no one in the audience. The public hearing was closed by Chairman Berg at 8:02 P.M. The staff report containing the project description, background and suggested Conditions of Approval was reviewed by the Commission with questions being answered by the Planner. On motion by Chairman Berg, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, this matter was continued as requested in the letter from CM Engineering Assoc., to our next meeting of July 3, 1984, in order to give staff a chance to try and work with applicant. Motion carried. The public hearing was re- opened by Chairman Berg at 8:16 P.M., and the record should still show that there was no one in the audience. Hearing continued to July 3, 1984. On motion by Chairman Berg, seconded by Commissioner Remy, the meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M. AN UNOFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT Chairman Berg is getting married. Congratulations Roger from All! Respectfully submitted, berry y or Planning Commi sion Secretary /_� BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tues- day, June 5, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Chairman Berg presiding: 1. Call to Order at 7:05 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. On Roll Call the following Commissioners were present: Shaw, Tapp, Thompson, Schuelke, and Chairman Berg. Let the record show Commissioner Remy and Medina arrived after roll call. 4. The Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 22, 1984 were approved as submitted. PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS: Item 4 OUT OF SEQUENCE (a) Site Plan Review - 773 Edgar Avenue - Robert Taylor, Applicant The Hearing was opened by the Planning Director at 7:08 P.M. Those speaking from the audience in favor was an unidentified man who was a friend of the Taylor's. Questions from the Commission were answered by the Planning Director and Mr. Robert Taylor. There being no further proponents or opponents, the hearing was closed at 7:33 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Shaw, second by Commissioner Tapp for approval as presented by Planning Director with (d) under RECOMMENDATION added to read: "Meet all applicable Building Codes." Further, that it be presented with a note to the City Council for them to consider an Urgency Ordinance in regard to placement of Mobilehomes and a follow -up with a permanent ordinance utilizing the prior ordinance and be returned back to the Planning Commission. To be placed on the Planning Commission's next agenda for the meeting of June 19, 1984. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Tapp, Medina and Chairman Berg. NOES: Commissioners Schuelke and Thompson ABSTAIN: None Item 2 OUT OF SEQUENCE Request for Change in Conditions of Approval - Conditional Use Permit No. 1005 (82- CUP -3) - Seeburger The Hearing was opened by the Planning Director at 7:36 P.M. Those speaking from the audience were: Mrs. Janet Seeburger, 985 Beaumont Ave., Beaumont, spoke in favor. Mr. Irish Mitchell, 402 E. 6th St., Beaumont, spoke in favor and stated he had worked with the Seeburger's. Further, that Mr. Daugherty (previous City Attorney) had filed against the property to guarantee that when the rest of Page 1 of 3 pages Beaumont Planning Commission June 5, 1984 Item 2 (continued) the alley is done, that this piece of property is obligated to do their portion of the alley also - without any further controversy. When and if there is other improvement in the area, it would be required to do all the curbs and gutters to be compatible. Questions from the Commission were answered by the Planning Director and Mr. Albert Seeburger. There being no further proponents or opponents the hearing was closed at 7:53 P.M. Motion was made by Commissioner Thompson, second by Com- missioner Remy that a six (6) month extension be granted with the amended conditions as follows: No. 3 (A) Delete - An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed. (B) Delete - three (3) and replace with two (2) driveway aprons on Tenth Street shall be removed and replaced with concrete curb and gutter. No. 10 Delete - The occupancy permit shall be issued without the completion of off -site improvements on 10th Street. From the time of occupancy the owner shall have six (6) months within which the off -site improvements shall not have to be made. AYES: Commissioners Shaw, Remy, Schuelke, Tapp and Thompson. NOES: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Medina. ABSTAIN: None. Item 3 Request for Review of Conditions - (83 -SP -8) Plot Plan 1043 - Nathan Guerriero The Hearing was opened by the Planning Director at 8:48 P.M. Those speaking from the audience were: Mr. Harvey Marcell, 461 W. Ramsey, Banning, spoke in favor and explained situation and asked for reconsideration on improvements. Questions from the Commission were answered by the Planning Director and Mr. Nathan Guerriero. There being no further proponents or opponents the hearing was closed at 9:00 P.M. Motion was made by Commissioner Medina, second by Commissioner Tapp to deny the request for some deletions of conditions. Conditions of Approval stand as is with the most restrictive conditions applying, be it Caltran's or the City's. A reconsideration vote by Commissioner Remy failed with 3 ayes and 4 noes. Page 2 of 3 pages Beaumont Planning Commission June 5, 1984 Item 1 OUT OF SEQUENCE Zoning Ordinance Amendments (a) O -S (Open Space) Motion by Commissioner Thompson, second by Commissioner Schuelke to bring the O -S Zone back before the Commission at a later date to be processed. (b) R -A (Residential - Agricultural) Motion by Commissioner Thompson and second by Commissioner Schuelke to bring the R -A Zone back before the Commission at a later date to be processed. (c) RHD (Residential Housing Development) Motion was made by Commissioner Thompson and second by Commissioner Schuelke that the Planning Commission finds that adoption of the pro- posed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission approves the RHD Zone and recommends the City Council adopt same. (d) C -G (Commercial - General) Motion was made by Commissioner Thompson second by Commissioner Schuelke that the Planning Commission finds that adoption of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and recommends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission approves the C -G Zone and recommends the City Council adopt same. (e) I -P (Industrial Park) Motion was made by Commissioner Thompson second by Commissioner Schuelke that the Planning Commission finds that adoption of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and re- commends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission approves the I -P Zone and recommends the City Council adopt same. (f) PUD (Planned Unit Development) Motion was made by Commissioner Schuelke, second by Commissioner Remy that the Planning Commission finds that adoption of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and re- commends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration. The Planning Commission approves the PUD Zone and recommends the City Council adopt same. P a ning mm s n Secretary Page 3 of 3 pages BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 1984 The Beaumont Planning Commission met in a regular meeting on Tuesday, May 22, 1984, in the City Council Chambers, with Interim Chairman Thompson presiding. 1. Call to order at 7:18 P.M. 2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed. 3. On Roll Call the following Commissioners were present: Remy, Medina, Shaw and Interim Chairman Thompson. Commissioners Tapp, Schuelke and Chairman Berg were excused. Let the record show Commissioner Schuelke arrived after roll call and participated in the meeting from that time on. 4. The Minutes of Regular Planning Commission Meeting of May 8, 1984 were approved as submitted. PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS: 1. Advertised Public Hearings. (a) 84 -ND -7 - Westinghouse Adoption of Negative Declaration. The Hearing was opened by the Planning Director at 7:33 P.M. Those speaking as proponents of the adoption of the Nega- tive Declaration were Mr. Irish D. Mitchell, Mr. Lyman Burhop and Mr. Jack Bastin. Mr. Harold Blackaby spoke in opposition to the adoption of the Negative Declaration. Mr. Irish D. Mitchell spoke in rebuttal to the opposing statement. Questions from the Commission were answered by the Planning Director and Mr. Jack Bastin. There being no further proponents or opponents, the hearing was closed at 7:52 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Schuelke, second by Commissioner Medina, finding no significant impact upon the environ- ment and to recommend adoption of a Negative Declaration Page 1 b_sumont Planning Commissic May 22, 1984 for 84 -ND -7 by the City Council. AYES: Commissioners Schuelke, Medina and Interim Chairman Thompson. NOES: Commissioners Remy and Shaw. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Tapp. (b) 84 -ND -8 - Annexation to Beaumont - Cherry Valley Water District Negative Declaration, Beaumont Garden Apartments. The Planning Director opened the Hearing at 8:28 P.M. There being no proponents or opponents wishing to speak, the Hearing was closed at 8:30 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Remy, second by Commissioner Medina, to recommend the adoption of a Negative Declaration on 84 -ND -8 and forward to the City Council. AYES: Commissioners Schuelke, Remy, Medina, Shaw and Interim Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Tapp. (c) 84 -ND -9 - Cougar Sewer Assessment District - Negative Declaration. The Hearing was opened at 8:35 P.M. by the Planning Director. Mr. Irish D. Mitchell spoke in opposition to the adoption of this Negative Declaration. There being no proponents, no further opponents or no rebuttal, the Hearing was closed at 8:37 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Medina, Second by Commissioner Schuelke, to adopt a finding of Negative Declaration on 84 -ND -9 and forward this recommendation to the City Council. AYES: Commissioners Schuelke, Remy, Medina, Shaw and Interim Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Tapp. (d) 80 -CUP -6 - Yearly Review - Swap Meet - 1501 E. 6th Street, Gladys Bell. The Hearing was opened at 8:45 P.M. Page 2 C , :aumont Planning Commi_ ,rray 22, 1984 The Planning Director presented his staff report concerning the annual review of this Conditional Use Permit, enumera- ting those conditions of approval with which the applicants had specific problems, and reviewing the modifications which had been made to the existing conditions. The applicants, Gladys Bell and Joe Ryan spoke as proponents of the conditional use permit, and there was discussion involving the applicants, Planning Commission and Planning Director regarding their concerns with certain of the pro- posed Conditions of Approval. There were no opponents wishing to speak. The Hearing was closed at 9:18 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Shaw, second by Commissioner Schuelke, to approve Conditional Use Permit 80 -CUP -6 with the following amendments to the Conditions of Approval: 14.12. The Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to a two year review. 14.22. The swap meet hours of operation shall be allowed seven days a week, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, and from 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. 14.30. Improved off - street public parking (as required by other Conditions of Approval) shall be provided for a minimum of three hundred twenty -seven (327) vehicles, as per site plan. 14.33 The parking row shall be striped. Current and approved parking plan shall be on file. Each parking space on the parking plan shall be numbered and resubmitted to the City. The Parking Plot Plan shall show the number of spaces required in Condition 14.30,each numbered consecutively and prepared in accordance with City Standard for parking lots. Parking Plot Plan to be submitted within ten (10) calendar days after approval. Overall striping once a week with necessary touch- up during the week. 14.34. Deleted in its entirety. Page 3 41 aumont Planning Commis. May 22, 1984 14.40. The Animal Control Department shall develop regula- tions for the disposition of animals at the swap meet property, sold or given away. 14.60. Positive physical disconnection of electrial boxes installed on the base of the light standards shall occur and be verified by the Building Inspector within two weeks of renewal. 14.62. Deleted in its entirety. 14.70. The three east /west lanes A, B and C shall have signs plainly posted with the words "Fire Lanes ". 14.83. Overnight storage of saleable merchandise will not be allowed unless the applicant constructs a six foot chain link fence as required by the Planning Commission. Enclosure for overnight storage shall be limited to Spaces 83 through 93 only. Also refer to Ordinance No. 490, Section 203.1 (8), (13) and (14b). 14.90. Dust control method shall be 3/4" crushed rock which shall be applied to roadway and exclude parking stalls for striping purposes. Dust Control Method to be completed within twenty - one (21) calendar days after approval of Conditional Use Permit. AYES: Commissioners Schuelke, Remy, Medina, Shaw and Interim Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Tapp. 2. NEW ITEMS (a) Residential - Multiple Family, Section 17.20.200 of Ordinance 590 - Recommendation to City Council; (b) P -R Zone (Planned Residential Development) Section 17.35 of Ordinance 590 - Recommendation to City Council; (c) M -L Zone (Light Manufacturing) Section 17.30.200 of Ordinance 590 - Recommendation to City Council. The Planning Director reviewed these three proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance, giving the Commission background infor- mation for the necessity of these amendments. It was the concensus of the Commission to advertise these proposed Page 4 t 'da U111U11[. rLa4111114 1.V11LL111 4cay 22, 1984 amendments to the zoning ordinance for public hearing on June 5, 1984. (d) 84 -SNP -2 - Detached Sign, Redlands Federal Savings & Loan - Applicant: Quiel Bros. Sign Co. Motion by Commissioner Medina, second by Commissioner Remy, to approve this application as recommended. AYES: Commissioners Schuelke, Remy, Medina, Shaw and Interim Chairman Thompson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Berg and Commissioner Tapp. It was determined that although June 5 is a City holiday, the Planning Commission will hold their regular meeting on that date. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:43 P.M. /Y F'►�►'Y2A�'�- Acting Planning Sec re ry Page 5