HomeMy Public PortalAbout1986 PC MinutesBEA.JMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
JANUARY 21, 1986
the Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, January 21, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting called to Order at 7:06 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. Chairperson Schuelke announced that Commissioner Medina had
contacted her stating he is resigning his position as
commissioner due to the controversy within the City.
4. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and
Chairperson Schuelke.
Election of officers was held before continuing with the agenda
items.
On motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
Chairperson Schuelke was elected to continue as Chairperson for
the duration of the year. Motion carried unanimously with the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy and Gordon.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairperson Schuelke accepted this same position stating that she
would do the best she could.
Commissioner Remy nominated Commissioner Burton as Chairman Pro
Tem and Commissioner Tapp nominated Commissioner Jackson as Chair-
man Pro Tem. The roll call vote for Commissioner Burton as
Chairman Pro Tem was as follows:
AYES: Commissioners Burton and Remy.
NOES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Gordon and Chairperson
Schuelke.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Jackson was elected as Chairman Pro Tem with the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Gordon, and Chairperson
Schuelke.
NOES: Commissioners Burton and Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
4
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of January 21, 1986
Page 2
85 -PM -5.
Planning Director Larson presented the staff report, project
analysis, conditions of approval, rcommending approval of this
project subject to the conditions of approval. He noted that the
project map should show the zoning as CN (Neighborhood Commercial)
instead of RA.
Chairperson
Schuelke
opened the public hearing at 7:20
P.M.,
asking if
there were
any proponents /opponents wishing to
speak
from the
audience;
there being none she then closed the
public
hearing at
7:21 P.M.
turning the matter back to the commission for
discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Remy, seconded by Commissioner Tapp, the
Planning Commission recommended approval by City Council of 85 -PM-
5 with the elimination of Condition #6, with Condition #7
becoming #6, subject to the amended conditions of approval.
Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Item No. 3:
Proposed construction of a tri -plex with parking driveways and
landscaping. Anthony Martin, 86 -PP -1 and 86 -V -1.
Planning Director Larson presented the staff report, project
analysis and conditions of approval, recommending approval of this
project subject to the conditions, noting that the curb (driveway)
of this project should have an additional curb cut of 2 to 4 feet.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:36 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak; there being none she then closed the public hearing at 7:37
P.M., turning the matter back to the commission for discussion.
Mr. Anthony Martin, 916 Pennsylvania, Beaumont, addressed the
commission per request of Chairperson Schuelke stating that: it
was 40' from the driveway to the house; there is a chain link
fence all around his property.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan 86 -PP -1 and 86 -V -1,
subject to the amended conditions of approval to read as follows:
Condition #2: A minimum of five (5) parking spaces shall
be provided, none of which shall be
required to be covered.
r.,,,.q;r;nn aS. All trash shall be stored in closed
Planning Commission Meeting
Minutes of January 21, 1986
Page 3
and requires voting on by the commission. The amendment failed
for lack of a majority with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, and Gordon.
NOES: Commissioners Burton, Remy and Chairperson Schuelke.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
On roll call for the original motion, the motion carried
unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Additional Discussion:
1. Establish a schedule for General Plan Amendment
Applications and placed on the agenda of February 18,
1986.
2. Taxes on property that is dedicated right -of -way by the
City. Request the County to remove the property from
the tax rolls - to be placed on the agenda of February
18, 1986.
3. Update the Official Street Plans.
4. Recordation of statement that the proceedings for
redevelopment of the Beaumont Project Area has been
initiated - is showing on Title Searches that this
redevelopment area exists. The City Attorney should be
directed to take the necessary steps /correction, to
bring this before the City Council and have it recorded
so it will be reflected in the Assessor's office that
this redevelopment area does not exist - clarify the
record.
5. Meeting of February 4, 1986, will have three items on
the agenda - one for a 24 apartment unit complex that
is proposed at the southeast corner of 8th and
Michigan; a duplex at Magnolia and 7th; and Baldi Bros.
is coming in for a modification on their last building
that they had under their original development approval
plan.
There being no further business before the Commission, the meeting
adjourned at 8:41 P.M.
Respect /t /Afully submitted,
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 4, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, February 4, 1986, in the City Council
Chambers with Chairperson Schuelke presiding:
1. Meeting called 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:
Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and Chairperson
Schuelke. Commissioner Burton was absent.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of January 21, 1986, were approved as submitted.
Item No. 2:
A proposed plot plan of a 24 unit apartment project, located at
the southeast corner of Eighth and Michigan. Neal T. Baker,
Enterprises, Inc. (86- PP -2).
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis
and conditions of approval, recommending approval of this
project, subject to the conditions, noting that Condition No. 1
specifically states that the Deodara Cedar tree that is located
at the northwest corner of the property is to remain unharmed.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:14 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Jim Davis Inland Design Service, Yucaipa, addressed the
commission stating: wasn't aware that the Deodara tree had to be
preserved; possibly can save by taking out a couple of parking
spaces; each unit will be 650' sq. ft; approximately $350.00 per
month for rent; no knowledge as to being subsidized.
Mr. Rick Morrison, kitty -
addressed the commission
value in this area; noise
cornered
stating:
factor.
from 801 Michi
concerned as
t,
ty
Mr. Ralph Burnett, 1051 E. 8th St., Beaumont, addressed the
commission stating: before this project goes in, the sewer line
should be in good shape.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 7:30 P.M., turning the matter
back to the commission for discussion.
Beaumont Planning Commission
Minutes of February 4, 1986
Page 2
Item No
A proposed plot plan for a duplex apartment project located on
the vacant lot on Magnolia between 7th and 8th Streets. Larry
W. Partain, (86- PP -3).
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis
and conditions of approval recommending approval of this project.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:45 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents wishing to speak from the
audience.
Mr. Larry Partain 308 E. 12th St., Beaumont, addressed the
commission stating: there would be no problems conforming to the
conditions as listed by staff; didn't realize that an uncovered
parking space was required when he drew up the design of the
buildings; would prefer not to have the uncovered space because
of the landscaping he has planned; garages are actually
oversized; driveway all the way through to the alley; 1200 sq.
footage per unit - does not include garage; expects $450. to
$500. for rent per month; will improve his 60' of alley.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
closed the public hearing at 7:56 P.M., turning the matter back
to the commission for discussion.
on motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan 86 -PP -3, subject to
the attached amended conditions of approval which shall read as
follows:
Condition No. 1: Delete. "as amended to show one additional
open parking space ".
Condition No. 5: Added. Pursuant to applicant's verbal plan
there will be a fence installed on the north
property line and the east property line
which would be solid of some sort reaching to
the end of the duplex out to the property
line; a 4' chain link fence would go across
the westerly property line; a 6' chain link
fence will be on the southerly property line.
Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Burton.
Item No. 4:
A proposed Modification of Development Plan to increase size of
-a,- ana rolairpA narkina. landscapina and driveways.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 4, 1986
Page 3
is required) could it be left as is, in the event at a future
time if they (Baldi's) need additional space then they won't have
to come back before the commission to request a change; all
parking areas will be paved with asphalt or landscaped.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
closed the public hearing at 8:14 P.M., turning the matter back
to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner
Gordon, the Planning Commission approved the Modification for
Development Plan 81 -DP -1 and Plot Plan No. 1006, subject to the
amended conditions with all references to Exhibit "A" in the
conditions of approval to read "A as revised ". The amended
conditions shall read as follows:
Condition No.
1: Amended. The development of the project
shall substantially conform to Exhibits "A"
as revised and "B" as approved.
Condition No.
2: Deleted. The Plot Plan is amended to show
Third Street as it now exists on the General
Plan. Also the Plot Plan is amended to show
the deletion of the 25 most Northerly parking
spaces and the installation of the
appropriate street improvements, driveways
and landscaping for the half -width of Third
Street between California and Walnut Avenues.
Condition No.
11: Deleted. The driveways shown exiting to
First Street and Walnut Avenue shall be
barricaded so as to prevent normal use. The
barricades shall be such that fire and other
emergency vehicles can gain access if
necessary.
Condition No.
16 -B: The emission of radioactivity in dangerous
amounts as defined by state regulatory
agencies.
Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Remy, Gordon and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Burton.
Additional Informational Items Discussed:
1) Activity on 6th Street;
2) Extension of water lines by the Water Department;
3) Installation of fire hydrants;
4) Revision of sign ordinance;
5) Allocated money for Planning Director's travel to be used
r_._ ,,, ------ tha work Shnn in San
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
FEBRUARY 18, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission Meeting
on Tuesday, February 18, 1986, in the City Council Chambers with Co-
chairman Jackson presiding.
The meeting was called to Order at 7:22 P.M., and then adjourned to
the next Regular Planning Commission Meeting of March 4, 1986, for
lack of a quorm.
Commissioners present were:
Commissioners Tapp, Gordon and Co- chairman Jackson.
Commissioners not present:
Commissioners Burton, Remy and Chairperson Schuelke.
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
MARCH 4, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, March 4, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding:
1. Meeting called to Order at 7:02 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon and Chairperson
Schuelke. Commissioner Remy arrived at 7:04 P.M.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of February 4, 1986 and the Adjourned Meeting of February
18, 1986, were approved as submitted.
Item No. 2:
Proposed division of 5.46 acres of la n our (4) lots with
all lots larger than three -quart (3/4) acre in area. Harry
Mitchell, Parcel Map No. 21136 -1.
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis,
conditions of approval recommending approval of Parcel Map. No.
21136 (86- PM -1), subject to the conditions of approval.
Chairperson Schuelke then opened the public hearing at 7:07 P.M.
asking if the applicant wished to speak.
Mr. Harry Mitchell, addressed the commission stating he had no
disagreements with the recommendation of the Community
Development Director; had corrections to make on the staff report
as outlined below, Page 5.
Mr. David Sumner, Sanborn -& Webb Engineering, addressed the
commission stating that on the final map there is quite likely
there will be an adjustment between Parcels 2 & 3 - these two
parcels have a dwelling on them.
There being no further proponents /opponents, Chairperson Schuelke
closed the public hearing at 7:17 P.M. turning the matter back to
the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the Planning Commission voted to approve staff's recommendation
to City Council of 86 -PM -1, subject to the conditions of
approval. The following correction /addition were made in the
staff report:
Planning Commission Minutes of
March 4, 1986
Page 2
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Item No. 3:
Proposed construction of four (4) unit apartment with related
parking and landscaping. Thomas E. Medina, 86 -PP -5 & 86 -V -2.
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis
and conditions of approval recommending approval of 86 -PP -5 and
86 -V -2, subject to the conditions of approval.
Chairperson Schuelke then opened the public hearing at 7:24 P.M.,
asking the applicant if he wished to speak.
Mr. Tom Medina, 248 Elm Avenue, addressed the commission stating
that he felt that eight (8) parking spaces was sufficient,
questioned Conditions No.'s 2 -A; 3 -A; 3 -E and E -2.
CD Director Larson conferred with Mr.. Medina pertaining to the
dimensions that did not compute out on the map - 35' is
incorrect, has to be 25'.
There being no further proponents /opponents, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 7:52 P.M., turning the project
back to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Tapp, seconded by Commissioner Burton,
the Planning Commission voted to approve staff's recommendation
of 86 -PP -5, subject to the amended conditions of approval and
further, recommend to City Council approval of 86 -V -2. The
amended Condition shall read:
Condition #3 -C - All trash shall be stored in closed containers
located within an enclosed concrete block wall (six (6) foot min.
height) enclosure with solid wood gates which shall be located at
the rear of the property.
Further, it was requested that staff work with the applicant
pertaining to the parking located opposite the garage constructed
of a medium to preserve the landscaped appearance.
Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Item No. 4:
Proposed Schedule for Processing General Plan Amendment
Applications.
Planning Commission Minutes of
March 4, 1986
Page 3
Clarification of Ambiguity or Omission and approve the
quarterly schedule of General Plan Amendments to be
effective immediately;
and that an amendment to the motion include a directive that steps
be taken to follow up with a public hearing for a Textual Code
Amendment as a housekeeping item to remove the three (3) times
per year references.
Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Gordon, Remv and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: Commissioner Burton.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Additional Information Discussed:
1) Conference in San Diego - three (3) Commissioners, Schuelke,
Gordon and Remy will be attending;
2) Meetings not held for lack of a quorm, was recommended that
that as a policy, they should be continued over to the
following evening to prevent undue hardship to applicant.
3) Digging on Pennsylvania Avenue;
4) Council and Planning Commission - potential Joint Study
Session;
5) Zoning areas to obtain consistency with the General Plan.
There being no further business before the commission, the meeting
adjourned at 9:05 P.M.
yRespectfully submitted,
Plannin *sion Secretary
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
MARCH 18, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, March 18, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding:
1. Meeting called to Order at 7:00 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke. Commissioner Jackson was excused.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of March 4, 1986, were approved as submitted.
Item No. 2:
Proposed three (3) Lot Land Division of a one (1) Acre Property -
Tentative Parcel Map No. 21482 (86- PM -2), Lawrence J. Schram.
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis
and conditions of approval recommending approval to City Council
of Parcel Map No. 21482 (86- PM -2), subject to the conditions of
approval.
Chairperson Schuelke informed the commission that the applicant
is a client of her office and she has not in anyway been
connected with the sale of this property. Leaves it to the
discretion of her fellow commissioners as to whether she should
vote - does not have a financial gain. The commissioners felt
she should be allowed to discuss and vote on this project.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:06 P.M.,
asking if the applicant would like to speak.
Harvey Marcell, Engineer, addressed the commission stating he was
here to answer any questions that the commission might have; to
his knowledge the sewer physically exists; applicant at some
future time may come back to the city and request that the house
on the lot at Edgar be demolished and that perhaps in the future
two lots be made; however, at this time it is not possible.
There being no opponents, Chairperson Schuelke closed the public
hearing at 7:09 P.M., turning the matter back to the commission
for discussion.
CD Director Larson explained that school fees are only collected
upon construction when it is in conjunction with subdivided or
land division maps.; If there are no lot divisions involved then
Planning Commission Minutes of
March 18, 1986
Page 2
ABSENT: Commissioner Jackson.
Item No. 3:
Proposed seven (7) Unit Apartment Building. Bernard R. Fagot, et
al., 86 -PP -6 and 86 -ND -2.
CD Director Larson presented the staff report, project analysis
and conditions of approval recommending approval of 86 -ND -2 and
86 -PP -6, subject to the conditions of approval. IIe further
explained that Exhibit "A" he had to revise because the carport
spaces and the open spaces at the front of the property were less
than the 20' required length - Exhibit "A" (marked in red) shows
the extension. Ile noted that the problem in doing this, is the
driveway will have to be reduced in width from 20' to 15'. The
code requires 9' x 20' spaces and the applicant has provided a
10' x 17' spaces and in order to bring it up to code these
changes would have to be made.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:25 P.M.,
asking if the applicant or his representative would like to
speak.
Harvey Marcell representing the Fagot Bros. Construction,
addressed the commission stating: intent was that the post would
be set back about 4'; with a smaller parking stall you would
have more maneuverability; in the back they would probably
eliminate some of the posts and expand the 18' between the
carport so there will not be a post between every carport; posts
will be approximately 5" in diameter; the front posts will not be
15' apart; could be fewer posts that what is actually shown; the
reason the carports in the front are designed the way they are is
to accommodate the changes to the recent ordinances.
Rosellen Cooper, 10434 Chisholm, speaking for the Cooper family
addressed the commission stating: the elderly people living there
feel very strongly about high density; presented a petition
signed by 50 people that is against the project (see attached);
questioned apartment above the carport.
Mr. Joe Morris, 690 Massachusetts, Beaumont, addressed the
commission stating: not opposed to the apartments but is opposed
to parking; concerned about people parking on the street.
There being no further proponents/ opponents, Chairperson
Schuelke then ask the applicant if he would like to speak in
rebuttal.
Ken Fagot 435 Sherie Court, Beaumont, addressed the commission
stating: has several developments in the town of Beaumont and
the quality of construction is very high quality and does improve
the community; installing a large laundry room which will handle
the whole unit and maybe some people from outside - 4 machines
and 4 dryers; parking has met the building codes; good project
c,.,- mho ...,,n,n „n; +ve rnnvpntional financing - will not be HUD but
Planning Commission Minutes of
March 18, 1986
Page 3
to the commission for discussion.
Much discussion was had by the commission pertaining to parking,
playground, commercial laundry with CD Director Larson answering
questions recommending a variance for the front yard setback.
Chairperson Schuelke in agreement with the other commissioners
re- opened the public hearing at 8:06 P.M.
Harvey Marcell, addressed the commission again stating: we have
no objection to creating some type of screening or garages in the
front subject to the planning commission's approval; however, if
there are going to be garages in the front, we need some kind of
consideration i.e., reducing a 3' setback, on the side yards.
Rosellen Cooper, addressed the commission speaking for her mother
who lives at 685 Massachusetts stated: that the garbage
container is looking right in the kitchen window at 689
Massachusetts.
Chairperson Schuelke closed the public hearing at 8:14 P.M.,
turning the matter back to the commission for discussion.
After considerable discussion the planning commission decided to
continue this matter after asking the applicant if this
continuance would cause a hardship /time schedule problem and the
applicant responded that two weeks would not cause a problem.
On motion by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Remy,
the Planning Commission continued this item for two weeks to our
next scheduled meeting of April 1, 1986, in order to give the
Community Development Director time to work with the applicants
pertaining to the concerns of the commission. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon, Remy, and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Jackson.
Additional Information:
1) Material brought back from the conference in San Diego to be
perused and pertinent information given to the
commissioners;
2) Staff requested to have each applicant provide more detailed
floor plans and elevations for their projects;
3) Problem located at 326 and 328 W. 8th St., has been cited to
court;
4) Bus Depot - truck sits in front of the building full of
garbage - supposedly cleans up some of the good things and
then sells the items in the bus depot. Health Department
should be notified as well as the Code Enforcement officer.
m..._...41 -1 1... ,.. i-i F,r R i,, r tv of RPAmmnni' -
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
APRIL 1, 1986
The
Planning Commission met in a Regular
Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday,
April 1, 1986, in the
City Council Chambers
with
Acting Chairman
Jackson presiding:
1.
Meeting called
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:
Commissioners
Tapp, Jackson, Gordon
and Remy. Those not
present were:
Commissioner Burton and
Chairperson Schuelke.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of March 18, 1986, were approved as submitted with a
correction on Page 2, Paragraph 5 under Rosellen Cooper's
statement. Scratch "see attached" (referring to the petition
enclosed), since the petition was not included in the agenda
packet.
Item No. 2:
Proposed Seven (7) Unit Apartment Building. Bernard R. Fagot, et
al., 86 -PP -6 and 86 -ND -2.
CD Director Larson presented the Proposed Revision to Exhibit
"A ", Plot Plan Application, explaining the relocating of the
carport pursuant to the planning commissions' request at the
meeting of March 18, 1986. CD Director Larson informed the
commission that this would increase the maneuverability for the
parking; however, it would eliminate some of the required front
yard - 15' yard setback instead of 25' yard setback.
Acting Chairman Jackson opened the public hearing at 7:13 P.M.,
asking if there were any proponents for the project.
Harvey Marcell, 461 I4. Ramsey, Banning, representing the
applicants stated: he had met with Mr. Larson and discussed the
alternatives to the parking problems; screening along the
property lines with a 4' high wall will help with headlights from
visitors parking and may somewhat provide a security to the
project; currently there are fences along the sides; intention is
to expand every other carport with a beam; will not have a post
between every carport; carports will be staggered.
There being no further proponents, Acting Chairperson Jackson
then asked if there were any one in the audience opposing the
project.
Ms. LaDonna Morris, 690 1/2 Massachusetts, Beaumont, addressed
the commission stating: if you waive the setback rights and
Planning Commission Minutes of
April 1, 1986
Page 2
types of plants they are. Handicapped parking is not required
unless there are 8 or more units.
Ms. Betty Fechter, 659 Massachusetts, Beaumont, addressed the
commission stating: she was opposing the project for the same
reason as Ms. Morris; concerned about the sewer.
Ms. LaDonna Morris, 690 1/2 Massachusetts, Beaumont, addressed
the commission again stating: you previously asked if we would
be satisfied if the requirements were made - answer no, because I
feel one solution to the parking problem is being overlooked -
cut down on the number of units; concerned over the parking and
waiving the setback rights.
There being no further. proponents /opponents, Acting Chairman
Jackson then closed the public hearing at 7:29 P.M., turning the
matter back to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Tapp, seconded by Acting Chairman
Jackson, to approve Plot Plan 86 -PP -6, including the wall across
the area to screen the adjoining properties from headlights and
then across the front to screen the carports, and further,
recommend to City Council approval of 86 -ND -2.
Motion failed for lack of a majority with the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp and Acting Chairman Jackson.
NOES: Commissioners Gordon and Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Burton and Chairperson Schuelke.
It should be noted that on a tie vote, the matter is still before
the commission.
On motion by Commissioner Tapp for approval, seconded by
Commissioner Gordon to bring it to a vote, the motion again
failed for lack of a majority with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tapp and Acting Chairman Jackson.
NOES: Commissioners Gordon and Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Burton and Chairperson Schuelke.
At this time, CD Director. Larson informed the commission that the
appropriate motion now would be a motion to deny the project so
it can be appealed to the City Council or a motion to adjourn to
the next meeting.
On motion by Commissioner. Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Remy
to deny this project, the motion passed by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Gordon, Remy and Acting Chairman Jackson
oa h;a �,ntp Gn the applicant's would be better
Planning Commission Minutes of
April 1, 1986
Page 3
explaining the procedures that staff would have to adhere to in
order to bring this general plan and zone change to the
commission. Mr. Larson further explained that the reason this
matter was brought before the commission was because several
owners in the area have been experiencing difficulty with their.
lenders and insurance companies due to the legal non - conforming
status of the buildings. The existing zoning would not permit
rebuilding in case of fire or other damage exceeding 50% of the
structures.
Mr. Lymon Burhop, 1162 Pennsylvania, Beaumont -or 1020 Calimesa
Blvd., Calimesa, the commission stating: has the original zoning
map from 1957 when the zoning was all R -3 up to 9th Street to
Cherry - no density just simply R -3; has a General Plan for 1972/
1973 adopted by Riverside County to 1990; would like to request if
there is going to be a study that Mr. Larson address Neal Baker's
property North of 10th Street and between Pennsylvania and Cherry
up to 12th Street - all to be included in the R -3 Zone.
CD Director Larson explained that going through all of the RIND
properties would take 2 to 3 months - should have a land use
study on the RIID properties within the core of the City.
CD Director Larson further explained that he would prefer to not
rezone the property but to do a Textual Amendment to the RIID
Zone.
On motion by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner. Tapp,
the Planning Commission requested that this matter be referred to
staff for further review regarding the parcels in question.
Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Gordon, Remy and Acting Chairman
Jackson.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Burton and Chairperson 6chuelke.
There being no further business before the Commission, the
meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
P� faninin Commission
Secretary
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSIOI]
MINUTES OF
APRIL 15, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, April 15, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1.
Meeting called
to Order
at
7:02
P.M.
2.
The Pledge of
Allegiance
to
the
Flag was observed.
3. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke,
Item No. 1:
The Minutes of the Regular Planning Coram.ission of April 1, 19861
were approved as submitted.
Item No. 2:
Proposed Furniture b':anufacturing Building. ]anucl Valenzuela,
85 -PP -8 and 86- ND - -4.
CD Director Larson presented the staff re;)ort, project analysis,
conditions of approval, recommending approval of ci6 —PP -8, subject
to the conditions of approval. I• "r. Larson noted that tine fire
department's requirements had not been received, but commented
that the fire department may require sprinklers which would come
under Condition No. 8 of the Conditions of Approval..
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M.,
asking if there were any proponents /opponents from the audience
wishing to speak.
Manuel Valenzuela, 10403 Rush Street, South El Monte, California,
addressed the commission stating that: he is moving to Beaumont;
questioned Condition No. 8 - felt that it should be more
specific; wanted to know what his rights were in the event he
should want to expand.
CD Director Larson explained that the City Codes prescribes what
you can and cannot do and in this particular circumstance, if you
do not have any inflammable materials other than wood on the
property, you will not be required to have sprinklers.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 7:20 P.M., turning the matter
over to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Remy, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan 86 -PP -8, subject to
L
Planning Commission Minutes of
April 15, 1985
Page 2
Item 3
ication to Previously Approved Plot Plan 85-pp-14,
Proposed C ^.odif
Victor SchirO. this project
resented the background a nrecommendation,
CD Director Larson P given
outlining the three alternatives To read 3 - 3 bedrooms not 3 -
noting a correction under Units:
2 bedrooms.
huelke then op ened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M.,
onents from the audience wishing to
Chairperson Sc
asking for proponents /opp
speak.
addressed the commission stating`
Mr. Victor Schiro, RiversiY�ovinq the street side parkingthat
the revision includes, �aers n with an
allowing the addition aofaaintovawoneabeedroom anversion of
parking requests that the space in
street -side p g all
attached one car garage for parking; petition signed by
presented a p as having
front have no cover; 1 royal as well
surrounding neighbors showing their app
three neighbors present in the audience.
There being no one else in the audience wishing to speak,
turChairperson
ing the closed the P.M.,
turning
After lengthy discussion, it was decided that the public hearing
tion from the applicant.
is
be reopened is gain more informa
Chairperson Schuelke reopened the public hearing at 7:51 P.M.,
asking Mr. Schiro to address the commission again.
Mr. Victor Schiro, Riverside, addressed the commission informing
them that when the Baldi Bros. protect was appealed to the City
Council the right of way was given up from 5th Street
to 14th
Street on Chestnut Avenue making 28' frlme re25ui setback aaad wthe
the right of way given up, Y
thought of asking for a variance was reiterating something that
didn't need to be done because with the right of way removed they
had their setback.
CD Director Larson explained that there was never any abandonment
just a reduction of the front yard setback. vacant
It was noted by tlie osl3thtStreeteonothelBaldieBros. appeal
Chestnut from 5th Street
when they constructed their. apartments.
Chairperson Schuelke then closed the public hearing at 8:00 P.M.,
turning the matter back to the commission for additional
discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner
Burton, the Planning Commission voted to approve 85 -PP -14
_._. I __ __: ; ♦, nnn vicurl to nP9rm1t One additional
Planning Commission minutes of
April 15, '1966
Page 3
CD Director Larson informed the commission that staff will check
into the proposed abandonment on Chestnut Avenue.
Additional Information:
A memo was given to the commissioners by staff rescheduling the
June 3, 1986 meeting to June 10, 1986 and the meetings of June
17th and July 1, 1986 are to be cancelled clue to vacations.
Vaction: Chairperson Schuelke will be gone from 7une 30th to
July 11, 1986.
There being no further business before the commission, the
meeting adjourned at 8:16 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
P' Tannin oZ ion Secretary
Br:AUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
MAY 6, 1986
The
Planning Commission met in a
Regular Planning
Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, May 6, 1986,
in the City Council
Chambers
with
Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1.
Meeting called to Order at 7:05
P.M.
2.
Tile Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag was observed.
3.
on Roll Call, the following
Commissioners were
present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton,
Jackson, Gordon,
Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
Item No. 1:
The approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission of
April 15, 19 was continued to the next Regular. Planning Commission
Meeting of May 20, 1986, due to a request from the City Council in
the form of a Minute Order dated April 28, 1986, that a portion of
the Minutes pertaining to Schiro be continued. On motion by
Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the Minutes
of April 15, 1986, was continued to May 20, 1986. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Jackson, Gordon, Remv and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: Commissioner Burton.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: ?done.
Item No. 2:
Request for Variance to Allow a Fence to Encroach Upon City
Street Right -of -way. Green, 86 -V -3.
CD Director Larson presented the project analysis, conditions of
approval, explaining the exhibits and stating that if the
commission approves this project they must do so with findings.
He further explained that building permits were not necessary
according to the code except for masonry or front yard fences and
would investigate the issuance of building permits for fences.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:24 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Cary Green, 1005 Magnolia, Beaumont, addressed the commission
stating: fence was completed except for the gates when the
building inspector approached him and informed him that he needed
to get a permit; fence encroaches upon city right -of -way; got a
building permit and a variance application from the city;
Planning Commission Minutes of
May 6, 1986
Page 2
CD Director Larson noted that according to the ordinance, unless
it is a block wall it is not necessary to have a building permit;
however he will again check the code and inform the commission.
Further, he will investigate the issuance of building permits for
fences since concerns were raised by the commission.
Liability was discussed and Mr. Larson informed the commission
that liability would lie with the owner; however the city could
be named as well as the property owner - which is called "deep -
pocket".
On motion by Commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner Remy,
the Planning Commission recommended approval of Variance 86 -V -3
with the findings of the staff and subject to the condition
proposed adding a second condition which shall read:
That erosion control in a manner similar to that on the
front half of the fence be continued to the rear and
that the encroachment include the 12 1/2 extension of
the fence to the alley.
Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners
Schuelke.
NOES:
Commissioners
ABSTAIN:
None.
ABSENT:
None.
Item No. 3:
Proposed Forty -eight
Single Family Homes
Burton, Jackson, Remy
Tapp and Gordon.
(48) Lot Subdivision for
Baker, 86 -TM -1.
and Chairperson
Construction of
CD Director Larson presented the project analysis, conditions of
approval, recommending approval of Negative Declaration No. 86 -ND-
5 and Tentative Tract Map No. 10018 to the City Council, subject
to the conditions of approval and based upon the findings. Ile
explained that construction will start on the first 14 lots before
this map is finalized.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 8:00 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
There being no one in the audience wishing to speak, Chairpeson
Schuelke then closed the public hearing at 8:00 P.M., turning the
matter back to the commission for discussion.
Discussion was had pertaining to street lighting, paving of Cherry
Avenue, the sewer system and its availability, the 14 lots that
had already been finalized; the variance expiration. Mr. Larson
explained that he had been unable to find the previous conditions
pertaining to the 14 lots - there was nothing in the planning
files on the first project.
Planning Commission Minutes of
May 6, 1986
Page 3
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
CD Director Larson requested that the commission keen their staff
reports and maps pertaining to this project for the next meeting.
Item No. 4:
Proposed Forty (40) Unit Apartment Complex. Nick Tavaglione, 86-
PP-9, 86 -V -4 and 86 -ND -6.
CD Director Larson presented the project analysis, staff report,
and conditions of approval recommending approval of this project.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 8:49 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Nick Tavaglione, Sr., Riverside, addressed the commission
stating that: he concurs with the conditions; project larger than
the present senior citizen's apartments at 10th Street; working on
CHAP Subsidv; not restricted to seniors; feels it would be a
better situation with just seniors; 2 bedrooms will be
approximately $460. per month - smaller apartments closer. to $400.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 8:55 P.M., turning the matter
back to the commission.
Discussion was had by the commission with Mr. Tavaglione again
addressing the commission stating: lie was not objectionable to
the 42" wall for narking - wanted it as a condition; could cut
down on the landscaping center and make the parking spaces larger;
will put in heavy foliage.
CD Director assured the commissioners that Mr. Tavaglione could
meet the code requirement in parking by making alterations in the
proposed landscaping; thus making the parking spaces 9 x 20
instead of 9 x 17.
On motion by Commissioner. Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the Planning Commission voted to approve Plot Plan No. 86 -PP -9,
and Variance 86 -V -4 with the deletion of the landscaping planter
in the center of the covered parking making the covered parking
spaces 9 x 20 as well as the parking on the sides, also a 42"
block wall along the side separating the two properties facing
Cherry Avenue. Commissioner Jackson amended the motion to include
two compact parking spaces which will be located near the
building. Further, the commission recommended to City Council
approval of Negative Declaration 86 -ND -6. Motion carried
unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
Planning Commission Minutes of
May 6, 1986
Page 4
Discussion as why the City Council did not want the commission to
approve a certain portion of the Minutes of April 15, 1986.
Commissioner Gordon will be gone for the month of June 1986.
There being no further business before the commission, the meeting
adjourned at 9:29 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Z/7 Secretary
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
MAY 20, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, May 20, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting called to Order at 7:04 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. The record should.show that all Commissioners were present.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of April 15, 1986 and May 6, 1986.
On motion by commissioner Jackson, seconded by Commissioner
Gordon, the Minutes of April 15, 1986, were continued to the next
Planning Commission Meeting of June 10, 1986. Motion carried
unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: :lone.
ABSENT: None.
The Minutes of May 6, 1986, were approved as submitted with the
following addition to page 2, second paragraph from the bottom of
page.
That the original Plot Plan Tract No. 10018 -1 that has
been recorded, be brought before the commission for re-
view.
Item No. 2:
Proposed Forty -eight (48) Lot Subdivision for Construction of
Single Family Homes. Baker, 86 -TM -1.
CD Director Larson presented the material he had obtained from
various commissioners pertaining to Tract 10018 -1, stating he had
found a copy of the recorded Tract Map on 10018 -1 which was
recorded on December 20, 1983. fie explained the three conditions
for this tract as well as the two extensions and the meaning of
tract phasing. Ile noted that he was unable to find any records
as to whether or not the City Council had ratified these
conditions.
Mr. Russ Garner Garner & Troy, Engineers & Surveyors,
San Bernardino, addressed ,the commission stating that Tract No.
--
Planning Commission [Meeting of
May 20, 1986
Page 2
normally not more width than what the Circulation Element calls
for.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:35 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Russ Garner, San Bernardino, addressed the commission again
stating: conditions as written are appropriate; serious
consequences on the development if 11th Street is changed to 88'
width; his firm did not handle the original 1977 approval.
Mr. Lymon Burhoa, 1020 2nd Place, Calimesa, addressed the
commission stating: doesn't like to be called an opponent - just
submitting a condition; representing his wife and himself; letter
before the commission for a request to be applied to this
subdivision (see attached letter dated 5/19/86); didn't realize
that the center street to the north is not a cul de sac; feels
that a 6' block wall would solve a lot of problems.
CD Director Larson explained that the fire department would
normally require a temporary turnaround.
Mr. Lymon Bur op, again addressed the commission stating: he
would like to voice his objection to this tract being approved
without a cul de sac to the north end of the center street; wants
a 6' block wall put in to keep headlights from shining on
properties; feels the applicant should withdraw the first 14 lots
and put the proper cul de sac in otherwise there will be an
appeal to the city council and possible legal ramifications.
Mr. Russ Garner, wanted to comment on Mr. Burhop';s statments,
stating: does not care whether they cul de sac the street with a
permanent cul de sac or a temporary one; original design was
based on the concept of the street eventually continuing north
even though it might be a number of years before this occurs; the
street provides a drainage outlet for the land to the north and
there is now an existing sewer line along that alignment and from
an engineering point of view he believes the street should go
through; has provided an additional 10' on each corner lot; if
11th Street goes through he presumes they will bridge the
channel; if 11th Street is the one selected then there should be
a collector's standard; sewer laterals and water laterals on the
first 14 lots have already been installed; recommends that "P."
Street be kept as shown.
CD Director Larson pointed out that on Item No. 3 of the staff
report, that the 60' should have been 50' in width.
Dr. Lana Blankenship, 1007 Pennsylvania, Beaumont, addressed the
commission and wanted to go on record as agreeing with Mr.
Burhop.
Mr. Russ Garner, commented that it is 48 homes on 10.2 acres.
Planning Commission Meeting of
May 20, 1986
Page 3
control.
on motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
to recommend approval of Negative Declaration No. 86 -ND -5 and
Tentative Tract Map No. 10018 to the City Council subject to the
amended conditions which shall read as follows:
6' to be inserted in front of "Concrete block walls"
in last sentence on page 1 of the conditions of
approval.
Condition No. 16 added:
Standard dust control per UBC to be used during
grading and any phase of earth moving.
CD Director Larson stated for
second A, B, C, & D should
After the paragraph that r�
Number "A" should be a small
gates" should be a small "b"
"Concrete block walls" should
in parenthesis.
clarification, Condition No. 4, the
read: 1, 2, 3, & 4 in parenthesis.
:ads "The following improvements ",
"a", the paragraph that reads "No
and the last paragraph which reads
be a small "c" - all small letters
The following are the proposed amendments made by Commissioner
Jackson, seconded by Commissioner Gordon:
Amendment No. 1:
Condition No. 4 (c) to include Lots 30, 31, and 62 with a
continuation across the end of "A" Street with a provision for
drainage from underneath the block wall. Motion failed for lack
of a majority, with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Jackson, Gordon and Remy.
140ES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton and Chairperson Schuelke.
ABSTAIN: Lone.
ABSENT: None.
There was more discussion and the reason given for objecting was
that it was felt that drainage underneath the block wall would be
a waste for the developer since there was acceptable drainage
already.
CD Director explained that a block wall would cause some drainage
problems.
Commissioner Jackson reiterated his amendment eliminating the
continuation across 'A' Street, but proposed that there should be
some sort of fencing provided adjacent to Lots 30, 31, and 62
from the front property line to the rear of the lots in each
case.
CD Director stated that the reason for constructing block walls
In Ac A� CA --A ca -- -.n cis i-I
Planning Commission Meeting of
May 20, 1986
Page 4
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairperson Schuelke explained to tor. Burhop that the public
hearing had been closed but ask the commissioners if Mr.. Burhop
could speak again.
Mr. Lymon Burhop, addressed the commission stating: that he
didn't bring the proposal for a 6' block wall in just to get
into the developer's pocket; block wall would stop a fire hazard;
he does not have an imemdiate benefit; insurance cheaper with
block wall; make Beaumont look like something.
M. Russ Garner, in rebuttal to Mr. Burhop's comments stated:
normally you do not have a 6' block wall within the setback lines
- thinks it would be unsightly; take into consideration the flood
control recommendations; if a wall is put across the north line
entirely, would have to provide drainage through the wall along
the length; depending on the lot elevation, we may need some
retaining walls; objects to the wall across the street between
the curbs; rear yards no problem; rear yard fencing in due time;
the plan before the commision does not illustrate the housing
because the plan has not been developed.
At this time, Commissioner Jackson withdrew the portion of his
amendment_ pertaining to block walls until the plot plan is
brought in.
Amendment No. 2:
That a turnaround be included as shown in the previous plan
submitted to the City in the grading plan for "A" Street. Motion
carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Jackson, Gordon, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke.
NOES: Commissioners Tapp, and Burton.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: 'Tone.
Amendment No. 3:
That the developer pursue the possibility of amending Tract
10018 -1 in regards to widening 11th Street to an 88' width to
bring into conformity to our Circulation Element. ',lotion failed
for lack of a majority with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Jackson, Gordon and Remy.
14OES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton and Chairperson Schuelke.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
CD Director noted that a 60' width would be sufficient which is
what is recommended by staff.
Planning Commission Meeting of
May 20, 1986
Page 5
boundary of Cherry Avenue opposite 11th Street. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Gordon, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
This taking care of the amendments, roll call vote was called
for on Commissioner's Burton motion, recommending to City Council
approval of 86 -ND -5 and Tentative Tract map No. 10018, subject to
the amended conditions as outlined on page 3 and Amendments No. 2
and 4 being incorporated therein. Motion carried with the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: Commissioner Gordon.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Additional Information:
Commissioner Jackson commented that he would like for staff to
bring before the commission valuation of current files, why files
are missing, how many are missing and what activity is planned to
reconstruct the files and further, that a form letter be sent to
all previous planning commissioners and council members
requesting information as to the files that is determined
missing.
CD Director Larson explained that most of the files missing are
from 1979 and before and that staff did not have the time to
reconstruct these files. Chairperson Schuelke did not feel that
staff should have to do this - possibly a committee could be
formed, with Commissioner Burton volunteering her time to serve
on the committee. Commissioner Jackson suggested a budget
request to the City Manager.
Commissioner Jackson stated that he would like to have an
opportunity to review the Minutes from the Planning Commission
before they are submitted to City Council. Further, records from
the commission is not reaching the City Council and they are
voting without an awareness and would like to propose that any
action that the commission approves or disapproves not be
forwarded to City Council until the Minutes are approved so that
the commission can police themselves so that inclusions can be
made in the Minutes if they are not up to date.
Chairperson Schuelke explained that this would just cause a
further delay and Commissioner Burton commented that the packet
in question did represent what had been done. Commissioner
Gordon stated that it represented what we had done but not why we
MAY 2 p 1986
CITY OF BEAUMONT
LNGINEERIN; DEPT
� r
� r
TO: eianniny
FROM: Ronald L. Larson, Community Development Director
DATE: June 10, 1986
SUBJ: Proposed ten (10) lot Single Family Subdivision. Paul
R. Turner., 86 -TM -2.
Applicant: Paul R. Turner, Inc.
39423 Tokay
Cherry Valley, Ca. 92223
Location: Southwest Corner of
Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th
Street.
Parcel Size: 2.51 Acres.
Existing Roads: Pennsylvania Avenue - paved
and improved with curb and
gutter. 14th Street, paved
- no curb and gutter except
rolled asphalt curb.
Existing Land Use: Generally vacant, except for
one (1) Single Family
Dwelling and expired Cherry
Orchard.
Surrounding Land Use: North - Mobilehome Park;
East - Vacant, Cherry
Orchard;
South - Single Family
Residential;
West - Cherry Orchard.
General Plan of Site: Low Density Residential (up
to 5 du /ac.)
Project Site Zoning: RSF, Residential Single
Family (6,000 sq. ft. lot
minimum).
Surrounding Zoning: All RSF, Residential Single
Family, except RMF,
Residential Multiple Family
across 14th Street to North.
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
An initial study was conducted and a Negative Declaration (86 -ND-
7) is recommended on this project.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide a 2.51 acre parcel into
ten (10) single family lots, three (3) of which will be 6,200 sq.
ci __ ,�N In con ct All -- .. --�eA 1'.i .ro
Planning Commission Meeting of
June 10, 1986
Page 2
and a fifteen (15) foot wide, 124 foot long sewer easement is
proposed to extend the existing sewer line to serve Lots 2 and 3.
Street lights are already existing at the intersection of
Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th Street and midblock on
Pennsylvania.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Commission approve Negative Declaration No.
86 -ND -7 and recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative
Tract map No. 21763 (86 -TM -2) with the attached conditions
recommended by staff.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 21763 (86 -TM -2)
The Tentative Tract Map shall conform to the requirements of
Title 16 unless modified by these conditions.
1. The final map shall be prepared by a registered civil
engineer or licensed land surveyor subject to all the
requirements of the State of California, Subdivision Map
Act, Section 66433 through Section 66443, inclusive:
Beaumont City Subdivision Ordinance and all the following
conditions.
2. All delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to
recordation of the final map.
3. Easements, when required for utilities, etc., shall be shown
on the final map if within the land division boundary. Said
easements shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the
City Engineer.
4. The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement upon
development requirements outlined below:
A. Curb and gutter along 14th Street.
B. Street pave -out along the same frontage requiring curb
and gutter.
C. Sidewalks constructed behind curb and gutter.
D. Completed in accordance with plans and profiles
approved by the Community Development Director.
Prior to issuing a building permit, the following conditions MUST
be completed and evidence of the same presented to the Building
Inspector:
(1) Improvement Plans shall be submitted and approved for
curb and gutter, with match up paving; sidewalk; and
driveway approaches.
(2) All improvement plans and grading plans shall be
prepared by a R.C.E. and shall meet the adopted City
Standards, Uniform Building Code (Chapter 70) and
approved by the Community Development Director.
(3) An encroachment permit for
way shall be obtained from
Director prior to any work
plans for the improvement
permit issuance.
The following improvements shall
occupancy except where a phasing
Community Development Director:
work in the public right of
the Community Development
in the right of way. The
s must be approved prior to
be constructed prior to
plan is approved by the
Conditions of Approval
June 10, 1986
Page 2
shall be 6,000 sq. ft.
7. FIRE PROTECTION:
The minimum requirement for fire protection facilities shall
be as required by the Riverside County Fire Department.
8. Drainage and flood control improvements where required by
the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District shall be provided:
9. Water shall be provided in accordance with the requirements
of the Beaumont - Cherry Valley Water District.
10. Sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in
accordance with plans approved by the Community Development
Director.
11. For grading proposed, the subdivider shall submit one
reproducible brownline and five prints of a comprehensive
grading plan to the Community Development Director's Office.
The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code,
Chapter 70.
12. The Subdivider shall submit a soils report to the Community
Development Director's Office. The report shall address the
soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
13. The subdivider shall provide
the Community Development D
the Plaster Sewer Plan for the
14. All utilities shall be under
City requirements.
15. Standard dust control per UBC
any phase of earth moving.
a sewer system acceptable to
irector and in accordance with
City.
ground in accordance with the
to be used during grading and
n� of BECZwwnt
DRAWER 158, BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA 92223 - 845.1171
CITY OF BEAUMONT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL.STUDY
CASE NO(s) 86 -TM -2
Tentative Tract No. 21763
BACKGROUND
Applicant:
Brief Proj
District/
Environme
ADDITIONAL INFO. REQUESTED:
1.) Date:
Items:
2.) Date:
Items:
DETERMINATION:
Negative Declaration: May 29, 1986
Date
EIR:
Date
Other:
ate
EVALUATION
1. Is the site subject to any of the following hazards? Yes No X
Surface Fault Rupture Ground Subsidence _Fire
— Liquefaction Flood or drainage Expansive Soil _
_Significant Groundshaking "_Ground Cracking '_Noise (over 60 dba)
Landslide or mudslide Erosion Other
2.. Does the site encompass, have, or is it adjacent to any of the following:
Biologically Sensitive Area Rare or Endangered Species None.
Archaeologically Sensitive Area 'Toxic /Hazardous Materials
_
Areas Requiring Quiet Conflicts in Land Use
3. Will the project produce any of the following at an adverse level? None.
Noise _Solid Wastes _Hazardous /Toxic Wastes
_
Smoke _Fumes Discharges
Ash _Substantial Traffic _Local Growth Inducement
Pedestrian, Cars, Trucks,
Airplane Traffic, Railroad,
other.
4. Additional Areas of Potential Impact: None.
Cumulative:'
5. Additional Significant Factors: A project will normally have a significant
effect on the environment if it will:
a) Conflicts with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community
where it is located;
b) Interfere substantially with ground water recharge;
c) Disrupt or adversely affect a prehistoric or historic archeological
site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a com-
munity or ethnic or social group; or a paleontological site except as
a scientific study;
d) Displace a large number of people;
e) Encourage activities which result in the use of large amounts of fuel,
water or energy.
f) Extend a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development;
g) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established com-
munity;
h) Conflict with established recreational, educational, religious or
scientific uses of the area;
i) Convert prime agricultural land to non - agricultural use or impair the
agricultural productivity of prime agricultural land;
J) Interference with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation
plans.
6. Is the project consistent with the General Plan Elements? Yes, all below.
_Land Use _Open Space _Scenic Highways
_Circulation _Seismic Safety Public Services & Facilities
_Housing _Safety '_Recreation
Conservation Noise Other
7. Consistent with zoning? Yes x No_
6. Are the following facilities available at the site; if not, how far is
the site from these services? Yes x No____
Public Road Sewer Schools Cable TV
Water Electric Parks Senior Centers
Emergency Services Gas Phone Other
9. Other issues or further explanations: Project consists of ten (10) lot
single family subdivision.
MITIGATION MEASURES: Standard city development codes and State Subdivision
Map Act.
AGENCIES CONSULTED: All city anc county agencies.
FINDINGS: No adverse impact possible.
n� of aawwnt
DRAWER 158, BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA 92223 - 845.1171
86 -ND -7
NEGATIVE DECLARATION:
PROPOSED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
DATE: May 29, 1986
APPL: Paul R. Turner, Inc.
AREA: City of Beaumont
PROJ: Ten (10) lot, single family
subdivision
Case No.(s): 86 -TM -2, Tract No. 21763
The Planning Department has prepared this Negative Declaration (ND) pursuant
to Section 15083 of the State Guidelines for the implementation of the Cali -
forciia Environmental Quality Act and the City of Beaumont Environmental Guide-
lines. An ND is a written document which briefly describes the potential ad-
verse impacts of a proposed project and why those impacts will not have a
significant effect on the physical environment. The finding of a Negative De-
claration indicates there are no s 4nificantl adverse impacts associated with
the proposed project and therefore 3t oe�not require the preparation of an
Environmental impact Report (EIR).
INITIAL STUDY SUMMARY: The staff of the Planning Department has determined
that ere are no potentially significant adverse environmental impacts associa-
ted with the project as proposed. The areas listed below were analyzed in the
initial study. Background information is kept in the Planning Department Office
and is a part of these findings.
Water
Soils
Flora
Fauna
Fire
Community
Services
Geology
Cultural Resources
Air Quality
Noise
Aesthetics
Land Use
,Traffic
Health & Safety
Energy
Parking
The 'x' 's indicate areas of potential impacts which were further reviewed and
are summarized in the protect review /finding section.
APPLICANT: Paul R. Turner, Inc.
39423 Tokay
Cherry Valley, Ca. 92223
PROJECT LOCATION & ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:
Proposed subdivision is located at S/W corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th
Street. Land is occupied by one (1) single family dwelling and various Cherry
trees in poor condition.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project as identified in the heading of this Negative Declaration
is described in detail in the official case file and environmental re-
cord which includes the initial study of this project. This information
is a matter of Public Record and may be reviewed by any interested mem-
ber of the public.
PROJECT REVIEW /FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT:
As a result of the Initial Study, no significant effects have been
identified which will not be mitigated.
Based on this evaluation, a finding of no significant adverse impact
on theenvironment can be made.
DOCUMENT PREPARED BY: RONALD L. LARSON, Planning Director
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Ronald L. Larson, Community Development Director V° "
DATE: June 10, 1986
SUBJ: Request for Modification of Approved Plot Plan (86 -PP-
9) and Variance (86 -V -4) to Allow Relocation of Forty
(40) Unit Apartment Building and Reduction of Required
Covered Parking Spaces. Nick Tavaglione.
Applicant: Nick Tavaglione
9000 Arlington
Riverside, California 92503
Location: Between 9th and 10th Streets
on Cherry Avenue.
Parcel Size: 1.44 Acres (62,726 sq. ft.)
Existing Roads: Cherry Avenue improved with
curb, gutter and sidewalk.
Existing Land Use: Vacant.
Surrounding Land Use: North - Multi - family;
South - Single Family and
Multi - Family;
Fast - Farm Land (County);
West - Single Family.
General Plan of Site: High Density Residential (up
to 32 du /ac.)
Project Site Zoning: RHD, Residential High
Density on North, South and
West. County A -1 -10 to East
across Cherry Avenue.
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
A review of the initial study and Negative Declaration (86 -ND -6)
was conducted and no additional impact is created by the
requested modification to the original Plot Plan and Variance.
No further environmental action is required.
The applicant is requesting the apartment buildings be relocated
ten (10) feet to the east to permit additional area at the rear
of the structures for grading to accomplish better drainage
facilities.
This change also affects the parking configuration and requires
that the easterly parking spaces which were originally to be
carports, now must be uncovered. Also, the fire department has
requested the driveways to be widened from twenty (20) feet to
twenty -four (24) feet in width. (See attached letter).
Planning Commission Meeting of
June 10, 1986
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of 86 -PP -9 (modified) and 86 -V -4
(modified) with the following changes to the approved conditions
adopted by the Planning Commission on May 6, 1986.
Condition No. 1:
Changed to read: The development of this project shall
substantially conform to Exhibit "A" revised.
dated June 10, 1986.
Condition No. 2 -C:
Add: "As required by Riverside County Fire
Department, letter dated May 8, 1986 ".
Condition No. 3 -E:
Changed to read: A minimum of 38 covered parking spaces and 44
open spaces shall be made available for the use
of the project.
� �Yf
City of Beaumont
Drawer 158
Beaumont, California
Gentlemen:
92223
RIVERSIDECOUNIN
FIRE DEPAR'rmEN'r
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
RAY HEBRARD
FIRE CHIEF
05 -01 -86
Subject: 86 -PP -9
Y
210 W I;S'I- SAN JACINTO AVENUE
PERIUS, CALIFORNIA 92370
l'FLEPHONE: (714) 657.3183
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot
plan, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures
be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and /or recognized
fire protection standards:
1. The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel
or construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established
in Ordinance 546.
2. A fire flow of 2000 GPM for a 2 hour duration at 20 PSI residual operating
pressure must be available before.any combustible material is placed on
the job site.
3. The required fire flow shall be available from a 701 -F3 hydrant,
(6 "x4 "x2 -2# "), located not less than 25 ft. or more than 165 ft, from
any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular travelways.
4. Install a fire alarm system as required by the Title -24 Code, Section
2 -1216.
5 The minimum width of interior driveways for multi - family or apartment
complexes shall be 24' wide when serving less than 100 units, no
parallel parking, carports or garages allowed on one side only.
6. Applicant /developer shall be responsible to provide or show there exists
conditions set forth by the Fire Department.
7. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in
Building and Safety.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
LS l�7 !'. IJ �11 WICLIAM77JUNES, WoUty Fire ors- al-
LI lJ ✓ /
cdt 1986
CITY OF REALIMONT
FNr,INEF...fRING DEPT.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PLOT PLAN 86 -PP -9
(Approved Per Planning Commission Meeting _of May 19861
1. The development of this project shall substantially conform
to Exhibit "A ".
Prior to the issuing of a building permit the following
conditions must be completed and evidence of the same
presented to the building director:
A. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the Planning Department. It shall
conform substantially to Exhibit "A ". Also,
it shall attempt to use suitable plant
materials which are water conserving.
Further, any sloped or mounded area shall have
ground covers which will prevent erosion. At
least 85% of the landscaped area shall be
covered with live plant materials. An
automatic sprinkler system shall be included
on the plan and installed in accordance with
city standards.
B. An encroachment permit for work in the public
right -of -way shall be obtained from the
Community Development Director prior to any
work, in the right -of -way. The plans for the
improvement must be approved prior to permit
issuance.
C. Construction plans shall meet all requirements
of the appropriate City Codes and Ordinances
and shall be in accordance with the
requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Marshall and the County Health
Department. The finished floor grade shall be
at least one foot above the top of the
curb.
3. Prior to occupancy the following conditions shall be
completed.
A. All yard landscaped areas and irrigation shall
be installed and maintained.
B. Driveway approaches shall be constructed.
These shall be constructed in accordance with
city standards and approved plans.
C. All trash shall be stored in closed containers
located within an enclosed concrete block wall
(six (6) foot min. height) enclosure with
solid wood gates.
D. If installed, any outside lighting shall be
hooded and directed so as not to shine
directly on adjoining property.
Planning Commission
May 6, 1986
Page 2
void and of no effect whatsoever. By use is meant the
beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this
approval within the twelve (12) month period which is
thereafter diligently pursued to completion.
NOTE:
The deletion of the landscaping planter in the center of the
covered parking making the covered parking spaces 9 x 20 as well as
the parking on the sides, also a 42" block wall along the side
separating the two properties facing Cherry Avenue. Further, two
compact parking spaces which will be located near the building.
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Ronald L. Larson, Community Development Director
DATE: June 10, 1986
SUBJ: Letter from Hacker Engineering Co., Inc. Requesting a
One Year Extension of Tentative Tract No. 19303. Roy
Kulikov (83- TM-2).
Attached is a letter from Mr. David Hacker, representing Mr. Roy
Kulikov and requesting an extension of Tentative Tract No. 19303
(83 -TM -2) for one -year.
This tract has had a one year extension of time which was
recommended by the Planning Commission to City Council on June 4,
1985.
State Government Code Section 3.5 66452.6 (e) provides that a
Tentative Tract Man may be extened in 12 month increments for a
maximum of three (3) extensions.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the
City Council approval of a second one (1) year extension of time
for Tentative Tract No. 19303.
Hacker Enine .r �g Co., Inc.
Civil Engineers
May 22, 1986
W.O. #5 -86 -10
City of Beaumont
550 E. Sixth Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Re: TR 19303
ATTN: Ronald L. Larson
Director of community Development
Dear Mr. Larson:
In behalf of Mr. Kulikov, we respectfully request a one year
extension on the Tentative Map for the above captioned property.
This extension will allow Mr. Kulikov the necessary time to
arrange his financing for this development.
Thank you for your consideration of the matter.
DH /jl
CC: Mr. Kulikov
ery tru'lIIy yo s,
David Hacker L.S.
President
Hacker Engineering Co., Inc.
Yucca Valley
MAY 2 31986
`t y OF Er FAUNJONT
Main Office: 490 S. Farrell Dr., Suite C -203, Palm Springs, California 92262 • (619) 323 -7720
Branch: 7281 Dumosa Ave., Suite 5, Yucca Valley, California 92284 • (619) 365 - 31311.
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
JUNE 10, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, June 10, 1986, in the City Council Chambers
with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting called to Order at 7:12 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke. Commissioner Gordon was absent due to vacation.
Item No. 1:
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission
Meeting of April 15, 1986 and May 20, 1986.
The approval of the ninutes of April 15, 1986 and May 20, 1986,
were approved as submitted with the word "temporary" stricken
from the Minutes of May 20, 1986, page 4 under Amendment No. 4.
Item No. 2:
Proposed Ten (10) Lot Single Family Subdivision. Paul R. Turner,
Inc., 86 -TM -2.
CD Director Larson presented the project analysis, staff report
and conditions of approval recommending approval to the City
Council of Tentative Tract Map No. 21763 (86 -TM -2) and Negative
Declaration No. 86 -ND-7.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:22 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Harvey Marcell, Engineer, for project, addressed the
comm ission stating: he was here to answer any questions the
commission might have; has not had a chance to look at the
conditions; not aware of the "for sale" sign.
Mr. Paul R. Turner, 39423 Tokay, Cherry Valley, stated from the
audience that the sign on the front of the property says
"coming soon ".
Mr. Harvey Marcell, commented that it is his understanding that
the existing structure is to be demolished or relocated; the curb
and gutter that would be installed would be the conventional type
similar to the Fagot Tract to the west.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
I'_- .W- .,..e.i;.. >t 7.95 P N . turni.na the matter
all the inspections and if
Mr. Turner's capabilities
checked or may hire
then asked that it be note
by a member of our staff
manner.
projects come in which are above he or
they contract with ICBO to have plans
specialists. Commissioner Jackson
3 for the record, since the project is
that it was addressed in an acceptable
Mr. Paul R. Turner, stated he builds nice houses, e.g., 1256
Euclid.
Commissioner Burton requested that the subdivision /development
plans pertaining to this project be brought before the
commission.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
the commission recommended approval of Negative Declaration No.
86 -ND -7 and Tentative Tract Map No. 21763 (86 -TM -2) to City
Council, subject to the conditions of approval. Motion carried
with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson and Remy.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Schuelke.
ABSENT: Commissioner Gordon.
Item No. 3:
Request for Modification of Approved Plot Plan (86 -PP -9) and
Variance (86 -V -4) to Allow Relocation of forty (40) Unit
Apartment Building and Reduction of Required Covered Parking
Spaces. Nick Tavaglione.
CD Director Larson presented the project analysis, stating that
this project had been approved previously, recommending approval
of 86 -PP -9 (modified) and 86 -V -4 (modified) with three (3)
changes to the approved conditions adopted by the Planning
Commission on May 6, 1986.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 7:41 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Mr. Nick Tavaglione, Riverside, addressed the commission stating
he had to make adjustments because of the fire department's
requirements; major problem was that the drainage was bad;%
carports could be put up front - but wouldn't look good; ask for
approval by the commission.
Ms Julia Szynkowski 885 Cherry Avenue, Beaumont, wanted to know
what Mr. Tavaglione is going to do with the dirt which is at
least 5' high; area floods when it rains.
Mr. Ilarvey Marcell, Engineer, addressed the commission noting
that: he was retained to do a grading plan for this project;
dirt in the parking area would be used to build a pad where the
buildings are in the back; south property line will have a
retaining wall so that there will be no drainage from the project
going to the south; to the north the existing project is built
somewhat lower than the street and that drainage will go down
through a 10' drain easement along the westerly property line to
__. _ -I- -- A-- -h h +h,, nt-har »nart-m(�nt oroiect on
Cherry Avenue and 8th Street that normally goes down these
streets.
Ms. Julia Szynkowski, stated she has a curb, but water is in the
yard when it rains.
Mr. Harvey Marcell, stated that at the property line between Pals.
Szynkowski and this project there will be a retaining wall and
on top of this retaining wall there will be a garden wall to
guard against the shining of headlights from cars; existing
dirt is from a previous project.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 7:54 P.M., turning the matter
back to the commission for discussion.
Mr. Harvey Marcell was allowed to spear: again since he had some
further inaut.
Mr. Harvey Lma.r.cell, wanted to address the landscaping on the new
site plan. Stated there is an additional 800' of landscaping
being provided - somewhat of a trade -off for the strip that is
being given up for the property lines.
Discussion was had by the commission pertaining to the parking
lot, covered and uncovered narking spaces, variance, and fire
department's requirements.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner Remy,
for approval of 86 -PP -9 (modified) and 86 -V -4 (modified) with the
following changes to the approved conditions adopted by the
Planning Commission on May 6, 1986, which reads as follows:
Condition No. 1:
Changed to read: The development of this project shall
substantially conform to Exhibit "A" revised
dated June 10, 1986.
Condition No. 2 -C:
Add: "As required by the Riverside County Fire
Department, letter dated May 8, 1986."
Condition No. 3 -E:
Changed to read: A minimum of 38 covered parking spaces and 44
open spaces shall be made available for the use
of the project.
Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Jackson, Remy and
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Gordon.
Item No. 4:
Additional Information:
Chairperson Schuelke informed the commission that Commissioner
Jackson had submitted his letter of resignation (see attached
letter) to become effective immediately. Commissioner Jackson
stated that the expense of maintaining two residences is beyond
his capacity at this time and that he cannot for;ee an immediate
opportunity for someone of his education in this area since he is
planning on earning a bachelor's degree in accounting and later a
master's in electronic data processing and auditing.
Cherry Festival was discussed - it was decided that four
commissioners woul& he riding in the parade.
It was requested that staff provide to all commissioners the
standard conditions of the fire department.
Planning Commissioners Association Summer Conference to he field
June 19, 1986.
There being no further business before the Commission the :meeting
adjourned at 2:18 I.M.
Respectfully submitted,
P i ➢1i1 i yto n Qwc`'etar7
BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 16, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, December 16, 1986, in the City Council
Chambers with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting was called to order at 7:13 P.M.
2. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was observed.
3. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present:
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon and Chairperson Schuelke.
Commissioner Remy was excused due to illness.
4. It should be noted for the record that City Manager, Robert
Bounds, conducted the meeting and also that Attorney Ryskamp
was present.
Chairperson Schuelke announced that she was not happy that her
letter to the City Council pertaining to the Resolution dated
December 2, 1986, was presumed to be connected with the dismissal
of Mr. Ron Larson. Mr. Bounds informed her that the letter to
the Citv Council did not dismiss anyone from the City.
She also wanted it noted for the Minutes that on project (86 -PP-
21) heard on December 2, 1986, that she had disqualified herself
from voting due to a possible conflict of interest; however, it
was the consensus of the commission at this time that sh�
participate in the discussion.
Item No. 1:
The Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meetinq of
December 2, 1986, were approved as submitted.
Item No. 2:
Continued public hearing on 51 unit apartment complex located on
the Southwest Corner of 8th Street and Allegheny Avenue.
Patrick Dezorzi, applicant, 86- PP -21, 86 -V -7 and 86- ND -20.
CM Bob Bounds informed the commission that the plan before them
was an amended plan reducing the units to 48 instead of the
original proposed 51 units by taking some of the units out of toe
center of the property which would provide for the requirements
as requested by the fire department. fie further discussed the
variance, parking spaces, carports and ccnimented that another
change from the last plan is that there will be more landscaping.
Co- chairman Gordon then opened the public hearing at 7:35 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
Recreation Services; 65 acres not fully developed. (See attached
letter).
Mr. Ro er Ber 1164 Euclid St., Beaumont, addressed the
commission stating t at he is not opposed to the project - just
wanted clarification on the ordinance pertaining to the covered
parking spaces - wanted to know if it had been changed?
Co- chairman Gordon informed Mr. Berg that it had not been changed
and that in the past on prior projects there had been open spaces
allowed.
Co- chairman Gordon then closed the public hearing at 7:43 P.M.,
turning the matter back to the commission for discussion.
Co- chairman Gordon commented that the original staff report says
that an initial study was conducted and an negative declaration
is recommended on this project. Iie wanted direction on the
handling of the negative declaration as to mitigating it or an
EIR.
Attorney Ryskamp stated that you cannot approve the negative
declaration without addressing this issue (the request for an
EIR). Further, he asked if an impact on the park and recreation
district was considered when the staff report was prepared. He
informed the commission that they need to address if there really
is such an impact - stated that what we are seeing right now
appears that we will have Mr. Ross in a similar letter on every
project; basically the district is looking to raise funds. He
further stated, that an alternative mitigation which is not an
option, would probably be to show that there is enough internal
recreation areas built into the project where there would be no
impact.
Much discussion was had by the commission pertaining to the
negative declaration, parking spaces, the elimination of the
driveways along Allegheny and 8th Streets and the variance.
Motion was made by Commissioner Tapp to approve Plot Plan 86 -PP -1,
eliminating the driveways along Allegheny and 8th Streets,
e
seconded by Commissioner Burton.
There was more discussion by the commission with Co- chairman
Gordon asking the applicant if he would like to address the
commission again on what he had heard the commission discuss.
Mr. Brad Worrel 1430 University, Riverside, from Archer i
Engineering, addressed the commission and stated that they are
willing to accept the changes suggested by the commission in that
they would eliminate the parking and driving lane along Allegheny
and the driving lane along 8th Street and replace those two areas
with landscaping and that they would cover the 21 spaces on the
west side.
At this point, Commissioner Burton withdrew her second and
Commissioner Tapp withdrew his motion, since it was decided that
the negative declaration was to be addressed first.
on motion by Commission Burton, seconded by Commissioner Tapp,
---- ___- A:.... ..,...., —i r; e-., rn„nri 1 of negative declaration 86-
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton and Co- chairman Gordon.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Remy.
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Schuelke.
On motion by Commissioner Tapp, seconded by Commissioner Burton,
to approve Plot Plan 86 -PP -21 and variance 86 -V -7 with the agreed
conditions of eliminating the parking areas and the two drives
along Allegheny and 8th Streets with 21 additional covered parking
spaces on the west side. Motion carried with the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton and Co- chairman Gordon.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Remy.
ABSTAIN: Chairnerson Schuelke.
At this time Co- chairman Gordon turned the meeting back to
Chairperson Schuelke.
Attorney Ryskamp noted for the record that we do have an ongoing
problem that was expressed by Mr. Ross from the park and
recreational district and that there be some type of direction or
request from the commission that Mr. Bounds negotiate with Mr.
Ross in order to reach some type of solution to resolve this
problem. It was the consensus of the commission for this to be
done.
Chairperson Schuelke commented that she felt that it was the
responsibility of the city to relate to potential applicants all
the different agencies that need to be contacted.
Mr. Ross, stated to the commission that this would prehaps be the
initial step in making people recognize that this is something
that is necessary - fee could be used to develop parks in all
areas of the city.
Commission recessed at 8:22 P.M., reconvening at 8:33 P.M.
Item No. 3:
Request for variance of front yard setback on street side of dead -
end street to allow construction of 3,000 sq. ft. industrial
building located at the Southwest Corner of Fifth Street and
Maple Avenue. William C. Harbert, applicant, 86-v -8 & 86- ND -23.
City Manager, Mr. Bounds presented the staff report noting that on
the first page, paragraph 2, should read "Maple Street"
instead instead of "Second Street ". Further, informing the
commission that he would prefer that City Council consider this
portion of Maple Street since it dead -ends and possibily have it
abandoned which would take 45 to 60 days.
Chairperson then opened the public hearing at 8:37 P.M., asking
for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to speak.
M. Donald L. Frandsen, 1062 Palm Avenue, Beaumont, agent for
William C. Harbert who is the buyer of the property stated: that
the road is unpaved and dead -ends at I -10; to abandon the road
___._11 �_ ___„_ -...v hic client: seller and
Attorney Ryskamp recommended that: the commission proceed with the
variance since Ile feels that the assurance Mr. Bounds has given
pertaining to the abandonment should be sufficient.
Mr. Frandsen, agreed and stated that he would advise the buyer and
se ler of the pending action to take place with respect to the
abandonment.
Mr. Bounds commented that he was prepared to put on the agenda a
resolution of intention for the abandoment.
Mr. Frandsen, stated that he is going to stay with the 3000 sq.
t. bui 1ng but is going to lenghten it to 75' and narrow it to
40' which will give them greater egress and ingress. Mr. Frandsen
ask if a building could be attached to the existing building'.
Mr. Bounds explained that a metal building could not go on a pro-
perty line. Further, that what is needed is an application to be
able to advertise for a plot plan - will go ahead with the
abandonment.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 8:59 P.M., turning the matter
back to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Burton,
for this project to be tabled.
roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES;
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Item No.
Commissioners Tapp,
Schuelke.
None,
Commissioner Remy.
None.
4:
seconded by Commissioner Gordon
Motion carried with the following
Burton, Gordon and Chairperson
City initiated General Plan Amendment revising City of Beaumont
Circulation Element to provide for planned bridge and grace
separations located at railroad crossings at Highland Springls
Road and Beaumont Avenue. 86 -GP -2 and 86- ND -24.
Chairperson Schuelke opened the public hearing at 9:35 P.M.y
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to speak
and there being none, she then closed the public hearing at 9:35
P.M., turning the matter over to the commission for discussion.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Chairperson Schuelke
recommending approval by City Council of 86 -GP -2 and 86- ND -24.
Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp,
Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
Burton, Gordon and Chairperson
Item No. 5: 4
any time.
Mr. Bounds commented that on a CUP or PUP when granted with no
restrictions, it is for life unless you change an ordinance.
It was noted by the commission that the eagles Lodge nor the Swap
Meet had not been back in for a review.
Attorney Ryskamp explained that what Mr. Bounds is explaining
is that there should be a requirement every year or two for a
review or at least there be a condition that upon any change of
circumstances, complaints as to type of use of property etc.,
there be a condition that would allow for a review.
Mr. Bounds wanted the commission to site him aomr examples in
writing if he was directed to check into any CUP's or PUP's.
Chairperson Schuelke then opened the public hearing at 9:06 P.M.,
asking for proponents /opponents from the audience wishing to
speak.
Pastor R. Dale Sloan, 525 Palm, Space 121, addressed the
commission stating that: asked the commission's indulgence in
allowing them to obtain said written permission - has talked to
several owners and they have said yes its o.k. - so he is
reasonably certain that said owners will give written permission;
small organization at this point; has approximately 10 to 15
people that assembles; never had over 5 vehicles; meets after
business hours; working on a project called "Christian Connection"
- mainly for shut -ins; will conform to any requirement of this
commission whereas it does not contradict the word of God.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Schuelke
then closed the public hearing at 9:17 P.M., turning the matter
back to the commission for discussion.
There was much discussion by the commission, with Pastor Sloan
asking if he might speak again.
Chairperson Schuelke then reopened the public hearing at 9:24
P.M., in order for Pastor Sloan to address the commission
again.
Pastor Sloan again addressed the commission stating: services
have been allowed by verbal consent from Mr. Larson and if that
was illegal it was not his problem; gentlemen in charge of the
planning department said that due to the smallness of the croud
he didn't see a problem.
Chairperson Schuelke then closed the public hearing again at 9:25
P.M., asking the commission if there was any discussion regarding
the fact that services are being conducted prior to the written
permission from the property owners for parking.
On motion by Commission Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Burton,
to approve Public Use Permit 86 -PUP -1 with the following
conditions:
1) on -site narking for five (5) vehicles be provided
1 cn 4....4 .,F n,fh ., rnnarty_ Written
ABSL'N'r. Comini ssioner Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
On motion to approvebPublic1UseoPermitr86- PUP -1, subject Ctom lo
the following
conditions:
1) On -site parking for five (5) vehicles be provided
within 150 feet of subject property. Written
permission from the adjacent property owners to be
obtained;
2) The permit shall be reviewed on a year by year basi.:; to
determine if any complaints on the operation are in
evidence. Such review shall be in public hearing to
determine if additional conditions on the operation are
necessary or if revocation of the permit is in order.
Mr. Bounds explained to the commission that you are determining
whether or not you are going to issue a PUP tomorrow morning or
whether we are issuing a PUP when all the conditions Have been
applied with i.e., the written permission is given to us.
Chairperson Schuelke stated that in the meantime they can continue
with their services but it is understood that they must
provide the written permission.
Commissioner Burton again restated her motion as shown above.
Motion carried with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon and Chairperson,
Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Remy.
ABSTAIN: None.
There being no further business before the commissi(�n, the meeting
adjourned at 9:39 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
P annin ommi ion Secretary
1
feaument•ct
Noble Creek Community Center
38900 Fourteenth Street
�Z!L1Art14 \rLti..Yn�.GM fv�:i
December 15, 1986
Planning Commission
City of Beaumont
550 E. Sixth Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Recreation
P.O. Box 490 Beaumont
Calif. 92223 (7141 846 -9668
. � (.: c. a✓ 1!. F+ iSrV 'IIFWfi'NM+71NR�%PMlW1�M99►1a
Re: Proposed Plot Plan to Develop 51 Apartment Units
on Property Located at Eighth and Allegheny Streets -
Applicant: Patrick DeZorzi (86- PP -21, 86 -V -7 and 86- ND -20)
Honorable Chairman and Members:
The purpose of this letter is to comment on and call to your
attention severe and significant environmental implications of
the referenced project which have not been previously considered,
and to request that a full Environmental Impact Report be
prepared pursuant to the City of Beaumont's Rules to implement
the California Environmental Quality Act.
The Beaumont- Cherry Valley Recreation and Park District objectso
to the Planning Commission's consideration of the Negative
Declaration associated with this project until sufficient
measures are incorporated to mitigate the adverse impacts which
the referenced project will have upon the Recreation and Park
District's provision of high quality recreational activities to
the children and adults of the Beaumont community.
The proposed project will of course result in physical.changes in
the environment including, but not limited to, the reduction of
the amount of land available for the development of park sites.
The significant number of residents which will inhabit the 51
apartment units also necessitate expanding the Recreation and
Park District's already over - extended facilities. At least one
public agency, the County of Riverside, has responded to the
and nark districts by increased
Negative Declaration until adequate mitigation measures are
incorporated, or require an EIR to be prepared for the project
pursuant to Section 15065 of Title 14 of the California
Administrative Code which requires a lead agency find that a
project may have a significant effect on the environment and
thereby require an EIR to be prepared where the project has the
potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment.
As part of that environmental impact report process, the
Beaumont - Cherry Valley Recreation and Park District of course
stands ready and willing to discuss its own concerns with respect
to the provision of recreation facilities within the referenced
project and the impacts the said project will have upon the
Beaumont community.
Very truly yours,
Brian A. Ross
General Manager
Beaumont - Cherry
Recreation and
n
Valley
Park District
BAR /br
cc: John Brown, Best, Best & Krieger, Attorneys
If
SPECIAL BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 19, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Special Planning Commission
Meeting on Friday, December 19, 1986, at 3:00 P.M., in the City
Council Chambers with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting was called to Order at 3:08 P.M.
2. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present.
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke.
3, It should be noted that City Manager, Robert Bounds was
present.
Item No. 5 from the Aerated December 16, 1986:
Request for Public Use Permit for church facility in c>xist:.ing
structure located at 273 E. sixth Street. R. Dale Sloan,
applicant, 86- PUP -1.
CM Mr. Bounds, presented the staff report and additional data for
the above referenced project stating; Pastor Sloan has gone to
people that have off street parking in the area that is within
150 feet of his property and no one is willing to give him
written permission; business owner indicated that he would
agree for them to use his parking lot on Sunday but that many
times it was needed on Wednesday; could not put in writing due to
sub - leasing; liability insurance would be affected; Mr. Sloan
here today to appeal to the commission to consider the
possibility of any relief that could be given on this one
condition that has been placed on the approval of the PUP.
Pastor Sloan, addressed the commission stating: they have within
their range plenty of parking to accommodate their church and
and would ask the commission's indulgence in waiving this one
prerequisite on our permit; hours of operation would be on,'
Sundays and mid -week one or two nights unless there is a revival
then of course it would go for 5 nights but the hours are after
6:30 P.M.
There was discussion by the commission pertaining to the parking
along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue, nuisance created by parking,
Section 17.70.200 in Title 17, and City's liability.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded 1)y Commissioner
Gordon, that Condition No. 1 be deleted under 1 ±ecommendation
referring to the on -site parking and written permission and that
the Commission finds that because of the loss of this parking, it
is not a detriment to the health, safety and general welfare of
the community and that the Public Use Permit No. 86 -PUP -1 is
nn t-hi,, date. December 19, 1986.
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
On motion by Commissioner Gordon, the Special Meeting was
adjourned at 3:58 P.M., to the next Regular Planning Commission
Meeting and study session.
Respectfully submitted,
Plannin Commion Secretary
SPECIAL BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
DECEMBER 19, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Special Planning Commission
Meeting on Friday, December 19, 1986, at 3:00 P.M., in the City
Council Chambers with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Meeting was called to Order at 3:08 P.M.
2. On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present.
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke.
3. It should be noted that City Manager, Robert Bounds was
present.
Item No. 5 from the Agenda dated December 16, 1986:
Request for Public Use Permit for church facility in (�xist:.ing
structure located at 273 E. Sixth Street. R. Dale Sloan,
applicant, 86- PUP -1.
CM Mr. Bounds, presented the staff report and additional data for
the above referenced project stating: Pastor Sloan has gone to
people that have off street parking in the area that is within
150 feet of his property and no one is willing to give him
written permission; business owner indicated that he would
agree for them to use his parking lot on Sunday but that many
times it was needed on Wednesday; could not put in writing due to
sub - leasing; liability insurance would be affected; Mr. Sloan
here today to appeal to the commission to consider the
possibility of any relief that could be given on this one
condition that has been placed on the approval of the PUP.
Pastor Sloan, addressed the commission stating: they have within
their range plenty of parking to accommodate their church and
and would ask the commission's indulgence in waiving this one
prerequisite on our permit; hours of operation would be on,
Sundays and mid -week one or two nights unless there is a revival
then of course it would go for 5 nights but the hours are after
6:30 P.M.
There was discussion by the commission pertaining to the parking
along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue, nuisance created by parking,
Section 17.70.200 in Title 17, and City's liability.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded 1)y Commissioner
Gordon, that Condition No. 1 be deleted under Necommendation
referring to the on -site parking and written permission and that
the Commission finds that because of the loss of this parking, it
is not a detriment to the health, safety and general welfare of
the community and that the Public Use Permit No. 86 -PUP -1 is
n„ this date. December 19, 1986.
Chairperson Schuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
On motion by Commissioner Gordon, the Special Meeting was
adjourned at 3:58 P.M., to the next Regular Planning Commission
Meeting and study session.
Respectfully submitted,
P -
nin b 'K Secretary
:SPECIAL BEAUMONT PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OP'
DECEMBER 19, 1986
The Planning Commission met in a Special Planning Commission
Meeting on Friday, December 19, 1986, at 3:00 P.M., in the City
Council Chambers with Chairperson Schuelke presiding.
1. Mcet.ing was called to Order at 3:08 P.M.
2, On Roll Call, the following Commissioners were present.
Commissioners Tapp, Burton, Gordon, Remy and Chairperson
Schuelke.
3. It should be noted that City Manager, Robert: Bounds was
Present.
Item No. 5 from the Agenda dated December 16, 1986:
Request for Public Use Permit for church facility in existing
structure located at 273 E. Sixth Street. R. Dale ;loan,
applicant, 86- PUP -1.
CM Mr. Bounds, presented the staff report and additional data for
the above referenced project stating: Pastor Sloan has gone to
people that have off street parking in the area that is within
150 feet of his property and no one is willing to give him
written permission; business owner indicated that he would
agree for them to use his parking lot on Sunday but that many
times it was needed on Wednesday; could not put in writing due to
sub - leasing; liability insurance would be affected; Mr. Sloan
here today to appeal to the commission to consider the
possibility of any relief that could be given on this one
condition that has been placed on the approval of the PUP.
Pastor Sloan, addressed the commission stating: they have within
their range plenty of parking to accommodate their church and
and would ask the commission's indulgence in waiving this one
prerequisite on our permit; hours of operation would be on
Sundays and mid -week one or two nights unless there is a revival
then of course it would go for 5 nights but the hours are after
6:30 P.M.
There was discussion by the commission pertaining to the parking
along 6th Street and Beaumont Avenue, nuisance created by parking,
Section 17.70.200 in Title 17, and City's liability.
On motion by Commissioner Burton, seconded by Commissioner
Gordon, that Condition No. 1 be deleted under hecommendation
referring to the on -site parking and written permission and that
the Commission finds that because of the loss of this parking, it
is not a detriment to the health, safety and general welfa4e of
the community and that the Public Use Permit No. 86 -PUP -1 is
effective on this date, December. 19, 1986.
Chairperson t;chuelke.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
On motion by Commissioner Gordon, the Special Meeting was
adjourned at 3:58 P.M., to the next Regular Planning Commission
Meeting and study session.
Respectfully submitted,
Plannin Commi ion Secretary