Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-01-2011 NAHPage 1 of 22 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MARCH 1, 2011 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Gonzales called the regular meeting of the Lake Elsinore Planning Commission held on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Cultural Center, located at 183 N. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. PRESENT: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Commissioner Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, Commissioner O'Neal ABSENT: None Also present: City Manager Brady, City Attorney Leibold Staff members present included: Senior Planner Harris, Planning Consultant Coury, Public Works Director Seumalo, and Office Specialist Herrington. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 p.m.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Jordan. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Gonzales Vice Chairman Mendoza Commissioner Jordan Commissioner Morsch Commissioner O'Neal Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON AGENDIZED ITEMS — 3 MINUTES None. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 2 of 22 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM(S) None. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) (1) District the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan Recommendation: a. Adopt a resolution adopting findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan; and, b. Adopt a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 36304 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. City Manager Brady provided an overview of the project and requested that Planning Consultant Coury review it with the Commission and answer questions. Planning Consultant Coury provided an overview of the project. He indicated that regarding parcel 3 which states 3.17 acres; this is a typo and should state 1.17 acres and apologized for the mistake. He noted that two (2) letters and three (3) a -mails were distributed to the Commission prior to the meeting identifying issues and concerns regarding the project and stated to the Commission that in all of staffs research, there was nothing they found in the Specific Plan document that would call out any different. The categories are identified as Residential Single Family and there is only one (1) Residential Single Family development standard within the Specific Plan. Although the lots are larger compared to the remainder of the Tuscany Hills area, he indicated that there is nothing within the Specific Plan which identifies "Estate Lots" and there are no other development standards for that. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that the confusion comes in the title because it says "Estate Homes" but isn't specified in the Specific Plan. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that Commissioner O'Neal was correct and noted that he did not have the chance to review the letter that was provided to the Commission but stated again that the Specific Plan does not recognize "Estate Lots", it is Residential Single Family through out and the minimum lot size for Residential Single Family, according to the Specific Plan, is five thousand (5,000) square feet, but should have an average of fifty -five hundred (5,500) square feet. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 3 of 22 He addressed the comments regarding improper noticing; the improper Burrowing Owl Study, and the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) issue. Commissioner O'Neal asked if the Home Owners Association (HOA) in Tuscany Hills does not apply. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that Commissioner O'Neal's statement was correct and in May of 2007 approximately twenty two (22) of the "Estate Size" lots de- annexed from the HOA. Commissioner O'Neal asked if there was construction on those lots at the time. Chairman Gonzales stated that there was construction. Commissioner O'Neal asked that if construction was within the last two (2) years, would CEQA apply. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that CEQA would not apply if it was part of a larger subdivision in the past two (2) years and noted that there was not a subdivision, and stated that the lots had already been split well over ten (10) years ago. Commissioner O'Neal confirmed with Mr. Coury that two (2) years does not apply in this particular case. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that this was correct. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that with the exception of CEQA there is a twenty percent (20 %) rule on slopes and if the slope is twenty percent (20 %) or greater, CEQA does apply and asked Mr. Coury to confirm that he looked into this. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that he did look into this with the City Engineer and the average slope is 14.85 %. Commissioner O'Neal stated that when rounding it off, it is basically fifty (50) percent and five (5) percent less than what would allow falling into CEQA guidelines. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that this was correct. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked who the original owner was. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that he would check with the applicant. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 4 of 22 REQUEST TO SPEAK Ms. Donna Holts indicated that she and her husband Raymond Holts are the property owners at 5 Via Del Lago which is adjacent to the property in question. She distributed a statement to the Commission and wanted to touch on the concerns that they had about the project. The first being erosion problems; there currently is some debris being washed down from the front of said property and across their property when it rains. There is also some erosion on the hillside behind their backyard; due to grading that has already been done for the "Sports Courts" which are now being submitted to the City as new home sites. She indicated that they are concerned that there is already some erosion that is visible; this will be exacerbated if construction is continued on those two (2) pads. The second concern has to do with the property value. Tuscany Hills Estates is a small community. There are only twenty -two (22) homes and when it was originally marketed by the builder, they were supposed to be "Estate Homes ", view lots, with lots of open space. Ms. Holts stated that if the subdivision is allowed on the said property, this would set a precedence for other homeowners in that community to also subdivide which could allow for a higher density in that community. She noted that this was not the original intent or the selling incentive to the original homeowners that bought into that community. Ms. Holts indicated that they feel that this could lower the property values in the entire neighborhood, specifically their lot. In addition, regarding the building for parcel #2, new residents would be looking directly into their backyard and so she indicated that they have privacy issues. She also stated that since grading has been done on the hill, natural hillside has been cut away. Ms. Holts indicated that regarding the Environmental Study, they don't believe due diligence was used in completing a fair and adequate study. This is because the study was done after the pads were cut, which virtually destroyed any habitat that was already there. Ms. Holts last concern was regarding input from the entire community. She stated that they didn't feel due diligence was done to notify all of the homeowners in Tuscany Hills. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked Ms. Holts if she was an original homeowner. Ms. Holts stated yes. Mr. Ray Holts, 5 Via Del Lago, indicated that he didn't think that the original grading was done to incorporate a couple of sports courts and believes that it got "snuck" in. He also stated that he understands that the applicant has quite a bit of property in the back and has already graded it. He also doesn't Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 5 of 22 understand the CEQA guidelines relating to subdivisions and asked for an explanation of this. Planning Consultant Coury explained the CEQA guidelines relative to subdivisions. Mr. Holts wanted to know if something more could be done to change the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan. Commissioner O'Neal requested that Mr. Coury or the City Attorney address Mr. Holts question regarding the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan. Mr. Holts indicated that he received the Notice of Public Hearing a few days ago and had no time to research this and this was why he was questioning this. City Attorney Leibold explained what a Specific Plan is and how it relates to "Estate Lots" in this case. Chairman Gonzales stated that the grading is creating an erosion problem. He also indicated that he went by the property and asked when the driveway was graded. Mr. Holts indicated that it was graded in 2007. City Attorney Leibold indicated that before any building permits are issued, precise grading has to be done to recertify the stability and compaction of said property. She also stated that even if the property is divided, it doesn't mean that a building permit is issued and noted that certain qualifications have to be met. Mr. Holts asked if staff what year that the driveway was cut in behind 7 Via Del Lago. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that according to the City's records, the grading permit was applied for in May 2007 and approved in April 2009. Mr. Holts asked if it was permitted and graded in 2009. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated yes. Chairman Gonzales asked if Mr. Holts is currently getting a lot of erosion on his property. Mr. Holts stated that he has placed sandbags at the back of his property and above his patio and pool. Mr. Doug Pinnow, 7 Via Del Lago, property owner for the lot that is being considered, noted that he has lived at that location since 2003. He indicated that Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 6 of 22 after he moved into the home, there was an occasion where the City extended the road on Via Del Lago, along his property line. This extension gave new frontage and had that frontage existed when the builder (Curtis Development) built the homes, he probably would have taken advantage of the facilities and put a few extra homes there. He also indicated that the homes he selected are on acre size lots or will be if there is any building there in the future, and stated that he could probably put more than a dozen homes there and still have been in compliance but he is sensitive to trying to have a good appearing neighborhood and chose the split of two (2) rather than twelve (12). He said that his neighbor, Mr. Holts has always been concerned about his privacy and stated that some years ago when they were still part of the Tuscany Hills Association, he wanted to place a gazebo on the pad. Mr. Holts opposed the location of the gazebo on the basis of his privacy issue, and the Tuscany Hills HOA decided against him. He stated that he took pictures from the pad location that would be nearest his yard to show the Commission what it looked like. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked Mr. Pinnow what year he applied for the gazebo to be placed there. Mr. Pinnow stated that he believed that it was in 2004. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked if the Association granted him permission to do this. Mr. Pinnow stated that the Association granted him permission but indicated that it was a concern because Mr. Holts felt that the gazebo location had a line of sight. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked Mr. Pinnow if he was part of the Association at that time. Mr. Pinnow indicated yes and stated that the de- annexation occurred late in 2005. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Pinnow if the gazebo was built and does it exist now. Mr. Pinnow indicated that the gazebo was built and where the gazebo was located. He noted that there is more than adequate space to protect Mr. Holt's privacy and was found to be the case with the HOA years ago. Vice Chairman Mendoza noted that Mr. Pinnow applied in 2004 for the gazebo and the HOA approved his gazebo. In 2005 he de- annexed from the HOA and clarified that this information should be on record and can be checked. He asked Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 7 of 22 Mr. Pinnow if he de- annexed from the HOA with the intent of having his own HOA because he couldn't do everything he wanted to do with his property. He indicated that the twenty -two (22) lots were unique from the rest of Tuscany Hills and they de- annexed to form an HOA. Mr. Pinnow indicated that this was incorrect. Vice Chairman Mendoza asked Mr. Pinnow if they were going to start their own HOA once they de- annexed. Mr. Pinnow indicated yes but it hadn't yet formed. Vice Chairman Mendoza stated that he was on the ACC Committee when Mr. Pinnow requested permission to build the gazebo. He stated that he couldn't have the gazebo because it didn't meet the CC &Rs of the Tuscany Hills HOA. He also stated that the RV storage, the RV Park, and the boat park caused dissention with the twenty -two (22) homeowners and as a result they said that they were going to de -annex from the HOA with the intent of having their own HOA with their own CC &Rs. Mr. Pinnow indicated that this was not correct. Vice Chairman Mendoza stated that he wasn't incorrect in his statement and indicated that twenty -two (22) homes de- annexed. He suggested postponing this item so that more information can be gathered regarding the de- annexation from Tuscany Hills. Mr. Pinnow indicated that they de- annexed because they couldn't find a commonality between their needs, the Architectural Committee, and the original HOA. He noted that the de- annexation process was quite elaborate. Vice Chairman Mendoza indicated that this was when proxy voting was allowed in the Association but is no longer allowed. Chairman Gonzales noted that the HOA is not the issue but the issue is whether to allow Mr. Pinnow to separate or not to separate. Vice Chairman Mendoza stated that Mr. Pinnow shouldn't be permitted to subdivide his homes because they are supposed to have their own HOA and CC &Rs. City Attorney Leibold indicated that this is not a City requirement. Vice Chairman Mendoza indicated that this was their request upon de- annexing from the HOA. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 8 of 22 Chairman Gonzales noted again that the HOA is not the issue regarding this item. Mr. Pinnow indicated that Vice Chairman Mendoza was incorrect about the CC &R requirements. Vice Chairman Mendoza indicated that Mr. Pinnow was required to establish CC &Rs for those twenty -two (22) residents, and since there are none, he is able to do what he wants to the property. Mr. Pinnow stated that this wasn't correct; the requirements that were considered were that the twenty -two (22) home owners in the "Estates" should look into forming an Association. Subsequently, they did look into forming an Association but because of the "bad taste" that was left from the previous Association, there was never a majority willing to form one, and noted that Mr. Porter, who was an ADHOC Committee member was currently in the audience and could confirm this. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that he was under the impression from what Mr. Pinnow stated earlier, that the previous HOA didn't give him permission to build the gazebo but once the residents got out of the HOA, he built the gazebo. Vice Chairman Mendoza agreed with Commissioner O'Neal's statement. Mr. Pinnow indicated that this was incorrect and stated that the HOA did give him approval to build the gazebo and said that he didn't understand the original HOA and what it had to do with his request to subdivide. Vice Chairman Mendoza indicated that this wasn't correct and stated that Mr. Pinnow also brought up to the ACC Committee a fence that they disapproved because of the established CC &Rs. Chairman Gonzales suggested continuing this item. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Commissioner Jordan indicated that the Tentative Parcel Map should have a legal description and wanted to know why there wasn't one. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that this was an oversight. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that Commissioner Jordan should have a formal legal description on the map. Commissioner Jordan stated that the legal description needs to be added. She also requested clarification of the easement notes relating to Via Del Lago. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 9 of 22 Public Works Director Seumalo apologized that this wasn't explained more clearly and noted the location of the utility boundaries. Commissioner Jordan asked Mr. Seumalo if that was supposed to be depicted on the map. Public Works Director indicated yes. Commissioner Jordan requested that staff add that to the map. She also requested clarification regarding Condition No. 4 which states "Prior to final recordation of the Tentative Parcel Map ". City Attorney Leibold indicated that the Tentative Parcel Map will be recorded once it is finalled and the finaling process for a parcel map is Administrative. Commissioner Jordan asked if it is a Parcel Map or a Tentative Parcel Map that will be recorded. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it is a Parcel Map. Commissioner Jordan requested that this be corrected to say Parcel Map City Attorney Leibold indicated to strike the word Tentative. Commissioner Jordan had a question about the grading permit, and asked if there was a Burrowing Owl Survey required prior to the grading permit being pulled. Public works Director Seumalo indicated that he would research this. Commissioner Jordan stated that she was uncomfortable with the survey of the Burrowing Owl because both of the surveys were done within one (1) week and none were discovered. She also asked where the driveway location was for Parcel 3 because she was having trouble distinguishing it. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that it is the common fifty -foot (50') easement and noted that it was at the end of the hammer head. Commissioner Jordan asked if Parcel 3 was at the end of the "hammer head ". Public Works Director Seumalo specified the location of the access driveway, the reciprocal access driveway, and the "hammer head" on the map. Commissioner Jordan asked if sixteen feet (16') of the driveway would be paved. She noted that it shows that a future turnout is suppose to be twenty -six feet (26') and when she scaled it out, it is not twenty -six feet (26') feet. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 10 of 22 Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that this is something that can be corrected on the site plan and indicated that he wasn't sure why it was shown on the subdivision. Commissioner Morsch stated that he also lives in Tuscany Hills, approximately forty -nine hundred feet (4,900') from the Mr. Pinnow's property. He stated that when he purchased his lot in Tuscany Hills, he was under the impression that the residents had a school, a park, a recreational center, and twelve hundred (1,200) homes which included "Estate Size" properties. He said that he wasn't active politically but heard some complaints about fences, and the fact that the "Estate Size Properties" or the "Estate Added Territories" were somewhat different from the regular R -1 lots in the rest of the community. He also indicated that Via Del Lago has the highest concentration of the smaller lots and they are roughly one and a half (1 '' /2) acres. Mr. Pinnow's property is three (3) acres plus and it was not part of the original grading but it was part of the added territory and included in the original CC &Rs. Further, he stated that the residents that consented to the de- annexation did so with the belief that these were "Estate Properties" and should be considered and treated differently. He also referred to Title 16.20.020 which states that lot sizes and arrangements shall be compatible with lots in the surrounding area. Also, Commissioner Morsch mentioned that in the City of Lake Elsinore's code, it states that they are bound to look at subdivisions in the context of the surrounding properties and to consider this particular project in the context of the others and he believes the tract map shows twenty -four (24) very specific added territories that were created with larger lots than all of the other lots combined. He noted that regardless of what the Specific Plan states, the people in the community assumed that whatever was done there was going to be compatible with that area and indicated that the issue he has is the size of the lots and compatibility with the neighboring properties. He asked Mr. Pinnow why there is an easement needed to cross Parcel 1 in benefit of Parcel 2, and why right -of- way for the utility runs beyond Parcel 2. Mr. Pinnow discussed the location of the easements relating to Parcel 1 and 2. He also indicated that before starting the project, he had considerable dialogue with Tom Weiner, the City's previous Director, who told him that the only requirements that they had to meet were the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan, and discussed the issue of density. Mr. Pinnow indicated that the main issue was that the builder did not put any fencing up and the HOA wanted the homeowners to put the fencing up at their own expense and initially, the HOA paid the builders to put the other fences up for the homeowners. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 11 of 22 Commissioner Morsch indicated that he recalled that the issues at the time were that they had frontages of approximately two- hundred feet (200') to four - hundred feet (400') and wanted white laminate fencing that looked rural. Conflict arose once they made that request and as a result, two- thirds (2 /3rds) of the Association agreed to release the added territory. He also indicated that since Mr. Coury is correcting the map, he suggested changing the easement line to a dash line to indicate the easement lines. He noted that the graphic scale is lacking some numbers because the bar scale doesn't have numbers on it to graphically show what the scale is and assuming the subdivision goes through, asked if the access road is going to continue to be a gravel road or paved road. He referred to Condition No. 7 which states: Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter of verification (will -serve letter) from appropriate utility providers to the City Engineer, for all required utility services, and requested to add "Each lot shall have separate and exclusive utility services, including but not limited to sewer, water, electrical, gas, and communications ", so that they are not piggybacking on sewer or any other utilities. Also, regarding the issue of grading, he indicated that he knows from experience that cross lot drainage is one of the biggest problems that his clients have so he would like to add a condition, Condition No. 24a to state the following: The applicant shall file a grading /drainage plan to eliminate all cross lot drainage to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Commissioner Jordan stated that if this project gets approved, who would be responsible for maintaining the road since there wouldn't be CC &Rs on the three (3) lots. Mr. Pinnow indicated that he has no qualms about the bill and noted that this area will remain as Sports Courts. Commissioner Jordan asked Mr. Pinnow that if he moves, who would maintain the driveway. Mr. Pinnow indicated that even if he moved, if it split, he would maintain it. Chris Pinnow gave his name and address and indicated that he is the engineer designing this plan and stated that the original Water Quality Management Plan required that the owner maintain all storm water which includes the driveway and the run off from the driveway. He noted that the road will remain a gravel road and will be maintained by Douglas Pinnow. Commissioner Jordan asked if sixteen (16) feet of the road will be paved. Chris Pinnow said eventually it will be paved. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Coury to explain what a dirt sports court is. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 12 of 22 Planning Consultant Coury indicated that it is identified as a tennis court, and a croquet court. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Coury if he followed up with Riverside County regarding the hillside requirements. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that he didn't get a chance to contact Riverside County regarding the City's hillside requirements but he reviewed the requirements and stated that there was not a hillside overlay placed on this Specific Plan in this area. Commissioner O'Neal asked if the City of Canyon Lake was notified about the hillside requirements. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that they were not notified of the project. Commissioner O'Neal asked if the City of Canyon Lake could be included as a courtesy notification. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that the City of Canyon Lake was outside of the three hundred (300) foot radius for notification. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that he understands that the City of Canyon Lake is not within the three hundred (300) foot radius but wanted to know if the City would notify the Canyon Lake residents since it does affect them. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that the City of Lake Elsinore does not require this. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that when he and Mr. Coury discussed hillside, they talked about fifteen (15) percent as opposed to twenty (20) percent and asked if this was correct. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that this was correct. Commissioner O'Neal stated that he has mixed feelings about this but Commissioner Morsch clarified some issues for him and he agrees with him about setting precedence. He said he would consider two (2) lots but not consider three (3) lots and recommended continuing this item because there are various issues and concerns with a number of people that need to be addressed. Commissioner Mendoza indicated that he agreed with Commissioner Morsch regarding the concept for "Estate Lots" because he knows they originally sold as "Estate Lots" and subdividing these lots was not the intent of the "Estate Homes ". He stated that the reason that he is aware of this is because he was there before the homes were there and when the residents wanted to de -annex and does Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 13 of 22 understand why they wanted to. He encouraged Mr. Holts to start his own HOA to get the other homeowners on board so that this doesn't go any further. Chairman Gonzales indicated that he agreed with Mr. Morsch regarding the "Estate" properties and said that he is against shared driveways. He asked if the homeowner has to maintain the street afterwards and if the property is sold, will this be part of the agreement of the sale. Commissioner Morsch made a motion that the Commission postpone this item and recommended to the owner that he bring back to the Commission an application with a two (2) parcel map lot split with a preliminary grading plan showing the elimination of cross lot drainage. He also wanted to include in that motion a copy of the de- annexation documentation and the stipulations regarding the de- annexation and what the "Estate Homes" are required to do once they de- annex from the HOA. City Attorney Leibold clarified with the Commission that if they choose to continue this item, it has to be continued to a date certain, or to an unspecified date, and if it is continued to an unspecified date then it needs to be re- noticed. Commissioner Morsch asked Mr. Pinnow how long it would take him to amend the materials. Mr. Pinnow indicated that he has no intension of providing alternative plans for a two (2) parcel subdivision, and invited the Commission to take a look at the property. He noted to the Commission that he believes that it is suitable as it stands currently for a three (3) parcel subdivision. Commissioner Morsch asked Mr. Pinnow if he understood that he risks denial from the Commission under Section 16.20.020. Mr. Pinnow indicated that the Commission will probably never face this particular situation in Tuscany Hills Estates again and they don't have to worry about forty (40) new homes being built there because in the eight (8) years that he has been there, no one else has thought about doing anything like this. He stated that he was the exception because the City extended Via Del Lago (in front of his house) to give new frontage to allow the subdivision to take place. He invited the Commission to review the records of the correspondence that he had with the City before he began the project regarding the dual use driveway, and conceptual plans, and noted that both were given the green light. He indicated that a considerable amount of expenses were put in at this point and although he does take seriously that he may face denial, he hopes that the Commission takes seriously that he has done everything properly with the City and if the Commission continues this, it would give them more time to review the material. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 14 of 22 Commissioner Morsch indicated that if Mr. Pinnow was still under the original CC &Rs and HOA, he would not be allowed to re- subdivide his property at all without Board and City Approval and asked if he was aware of this. Mr. Pinnow indicated yes. Commissioner Morsch indicated to Mr. Pinnow that the Commission has given him some latitude in considering an application that would include a subdivision into two (2) lots but since he wants to subdivide into three (3) lots, he is running into compatibility issues with the City of Lake Elsinore's Municipal Code. Motion was made by Commissioner O'Neal, seconded by Vice Chairman Mendoza, and unanimously carried to continue Tentative Parcel Map No. 36304, a request to subdivide an existing 3.17 acre site into three (3) parcels within the Residential Single Family (RSF) District of the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan, to May 3 2011. AYES: CHAIRMAN GONZALES, VICE CHAIRMAN MENDOZA, COMMISSIONER JORDAN, COMMISSIONER MORSCH, COMMISSIONER O'NEAL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE 2) Residential Design Review No.2011 -01. for the "Northstar" project within the neighborhood No. 4 of the Summerly Lake Elsinore Development of the East Lake Specific Plan Amendment No 6 Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving Residential Design Review No. 2011 -01 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and proposed Conditions of Approval. City Manager Brady indicated that Kirt Coury, Project Planner would review the project with the Commission and answer any questions the Commission may have. Planning Consultant Coury provided an overview of the project and indicted that the applicant was present. REQUEST TO SPEAK Ms. Sondra Harris, Vice President of Planning with Richmond American Homes, indicated that she was very excited to be back before the Commission again with another product from Richmond American Homes in the City of Lake Elsinore. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 15 of 22 She stated that she didn't have anything to add to Mr. Coury's presentation but referred to Condition No. 24, which Mr. Coury spoke about in his presentation, and requested from the Commission, approval of the California Coastal landscape design which they are proposing on the models only and noted that the parkway will be planted with turf and street trees and will be maintained by the HOA. Planning Consultant Coury indicated the California Coastal landscape design will be an option for home buyers but the typical front yard plans that Richmond American submitted have some turf and ground cover. Commissioner Jordan asked Ms. Harris why Xeriscape isn't something that they are proposing for the production because she likes the desert look with the mix of turf which gives a better street seen. Ms. Harris indicated that they have discussed this with their sales and marketing teams and the buyers are not so willing to accept this in their front yards. She stated that with the implementation of AB1881 which requires reduced turf, they made the turf smaller in various communities outside of the City of Lake Elsinore and got significant pushback from the communities which caused difficulty in sales so they are not currently proposing this type of landscape. Commissioner O'Neal asked Ms. Harris if the buyers would be able to request this as an option. Ms. Harris indicated no. Commissioner Jordan and Commissioner O'Neal suggested that Richmond American should present Xeriscape as an option. Ms. Harris indicated that they have tried optional landscape designs in the past and they have not been successful. Chairman Gonzales indicated that in his yard there is no turf, it is a wide variety of landscaping. Commissioner O'Neal encouraged them to rethink this issue and referred to the "Living Smart" product by Pardee Homes. Commissioner Jordan indicated that this would benefit homeowners because they would be able to save money on their water bills. Ms. Harris indicated that she would take the Commissioner's comments back to her team to review these options. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 16 of 22 Vice Chairman Mendoza asked Ms. Harris if her concern is uniformity with the other homes. Ms. Harris indicated that if a homeowner decides to do Xeriscape later, McMillan Development would ask the HOA to support this. Vice Chairman Mendoza thought it would be great to have Xeriscape in the CC &Rs if the homeowners request this. Chairman Gonzales asked if the homes in this development are required to have flood insurance because they are being built in a flood plain. Public Works Director Seumalo addressed Chairman Gonzales's question regarding the flood plain. Ms. Harris also referred this question to Justin Craig of McMillan Development. Mr. Justin Craig of McMillan Development introduced himself and addressed the CC &R's and flood plain issues. Vice Chairman Mendoza suggested that the landscape guidelines be as clear as possible which are included in the CC &Rs. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the CC &Rs governing all of the Summerly project have already been recorded and the City is the third party beneficiary within enforcement rights. Commissioner Morsch asked if a provision is in the recorded CC &Rs that require a minimum percentage of front yards to be covered by turf. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she didn't think that there is. Commissioner Morsch indicated that if there is built -in latitude in the CC &Rs then there is no specific mandate in the CC &Rs requiring turf and it is up to the Architectural Review Committee. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Vice Chairman Mendoza indicated that all of his questions were answered previously and welcomed the applicant to the City. Commissioner O'Neal thanked Ms. Harris for stopping by his office to discuss this project as well as others in the City. Commissioner Jordan indicated she noticed that on several lots, the plotting isn't staggered and she is concerned about the street scene and noted the similarity Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 17 of 22 of architecture between Plan's S180 and S192 and noted that the City wants to raise the bar but she doesn't think that this is raising the bar. Commissioner Jordan discussed how she envisioned the street plan in her mind regarding Plans S180 and S192 and noted that they don't have a lot of variation, specifically, not having the lots staggered. She also indicated that on many of the lots they are doing minimal front setback although she understands that the lots are small and asked if the rear yard setback with the patio is five (5') feet. Planning Consultant Coury indicated yes. Commissioner Jordan indicated that she noticed on the H and K elevations, the applicant is using a stone veneer, and wanted to know why they are not using a brick or a different kind of a veneer to make those look different. She stated that the roof lines on the bungalow elevations are almost exactly the same and suggested that there be some architectural enhancements on the D elevations. She recommended doing some kind of different stone on either the H or the K. Commissioner Morsch stated that Condition No. 26 is poorly worded and needs to be clarified and also wanted clarification of Condition No. 49. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that Condition No. 26 would be revised and also clarified Condition No. 49 for Commissioner Morsch. Commissioner Morsch indicated that this is just one (1) part of the development and stated that before the next section is built, asked how the water is going to get out of the development to the lake. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that at the one hundred (100) year flood condition, the water would drain to and filter through the golf course, and into the back basin area. Commissioner Morsch stated that the very lowest elevation is right at the minimum elevation to be above the flood plain for FEMA which is 1,267. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that 1,267 is a local required finish floor elevation. Commissioner Morsch indicated that the water level could conceivably be 1,263 with a wave surge at 1,267 is where they are currently at and asked how the water would get conveyed from this development, in addition to the other developments to the lake since they are already close to the floodplain. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that it would be stored in the golf course area until the water dissipates and noted that at the one hundred (100) year flood condition, other areas at risk will be the downtown areas. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 18 of 22 Commissioner Morsch indicated that this project is the most easterly developed project of the phases and that most likely, everything is going to converge to Village Parkway. He stated that the elevations of these finished floors are at the lowest they can be to be out of the FEMA floodplain and the next development is going to have to similarly be above 1,267. He indicated that there will be flooding at Village Parkway and from there into the storm drain, the golf course and then to the lake. Public Works Director Seumalo indicated that there is a one hundred and eight inch (108 ") pipe in Village Parkway so the storm drain systems are intended to go subterranean and at the one hundred (100) year flood elevation, there may be some surface flows on the streets but it will all go towards the golf course which is the planned storage and treatment area. Commissioner Morsch stated that he believes that Xeriscape landscaping could be done really well, such as creative architectural elements with stone work, etc. He noted that the only problem he has with this project is that there are a lot of small homes and he would be happier if a portion of these homes were around twenty-two hundred (2,200) square feet and had at least a four hundred (400) foot spread between the smaller homes and the larger homes and this would give the customer more of a variety to choose from. He indicated that he would like to see this in the next phase. Ms. Harris indicated that there is a huge demand for single story homes, not only in the City of Lake Elsinore but other communities in Southern California. Commissioner Jordan stated that she would like to see changes such as additional architectural elements to the Spanish Elevation for the S180 and the S192, and wanted to know why they are not using a different kind of veneer on the different elevations. Ms. Harris addressed Commissioner Jordan's suggestions Mr. Dave Ken of KTGY Architects introduced himself and indicated that he was also the architect for John Laing Homes as well as the Summerly models. He let the Commissioners know that their comments were valid and informed them that two dimensional renderings do not give justice and the plans give better detail regarding the different models. He said they would work with staff to enhance the models per Commissioner Jordan's request. He discussed the benefits of single story homes and how they will benefit the residents of the City. Passed and adopted the following Resolution: "Resolution No. 2011 -06 — A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, recommending that the City Council of the Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 19 of 22 City of Lake Elsinore adopt findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ". MOTION was made by Vice Chairman Mendoza, seconded by Commissioner Jordan and unanimously carried recommending that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore adopt findings that the project is consistent with the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. AYES: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Commissioner Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, Commissioner O'Neal NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Passed and adopted the following Resolution: "Resolution No. 2011 -07 — A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, recommending that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve Residential Design Review No. 2011 -01 and eliminating Condition No. 23 as well as getting direction from the Commission regarding the applicant to work with staff on the specifics of the plotting and facades ". MOTION was made by Commissioner Jordan, seconded by Vice Chairman Mendoza and unanimously carried recommending that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve Residential Design Review No. 2011 -0101 and eliminating Condition No. 23 as well as getting direction from the Commission regarding the applicant to work with staff on the specifics of the plotting and facades. AYES: Chairman Gonzales, Vice Chairman Mendoza, Commissioner Jordan, Commissioner Morsch, Commissioner O'Neal NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Planning Commissioners thanked the applicant for their products. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 20 of 22 Chairman Gonzales stated that he looks forward to Richmond American's residential neighborhoods coming to the City. He also referred to the letter that was drafted by Commissioner O'Neal on behalf of the Commissioners regarding the City's Redevelopment Agency and asked the Commissioners if they had any comments or questions regarding the letter. City Attorney Leibold noted that since the letter that Commission O'Neal drafted wasn't on the Agenda, it is for the purpose of information only and the Commission cannot take any formal action regarding this. Commissioner O'Neal thanked Ms. Leibold for her assistance with the letter and stated that he welcomed any changes that the Commission might have and requested that they initial if they agree and he would forward to the Governor. City Attorney Leibold suggested that an electronic version be given to Susan Reid in the City Manager's office to put on the City's letterhead and to be set up for signature and initialing. She suggested that Commissioner O'Neal also forward a copy to the local legislators who will be voting on the bill. She also indicated that in the last couple of days, the legislative counsel's office said that the Brown budget proposal to eliminate Redevelopment was legally problematic in light of Proposition 22 and the initial draft of the proposed bill is now available and can be provided to the Commission. Commissioner O'Neal stated that if any of the Commissioners wanted to add anything to the letter, he would be more than happy to accommodate this. Commissioner Jordan thanked Commissioner O'Neal for writing the letter Vice Chairman Mendoza stated that he concurred. STAFF COMMENTS Public Works Director Seumalo gave the Capital Improvement Program update. Planning Consultant Coury extended his thanks to the Commissioners for contacting him by e-mail and by phone regarding the parcel map project and noted that this really helped to gather and share information before the Planning Commission meeting. Senior Planner Harris had no comments. Office Specialist Herrington had no comments. City Manager Brady had no comments. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 21 of 22 CITY ATTORNEY'S COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold had no comments. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Commissioner Morsch thanked Commissioner O'Neal for taking the time to write the letter to the Governor regarding the City's Redevelopment Agency and indicated that he thought that it is important for the City's Planning Commission to object to the dissolving of the Redevelopment Agencies. He also congratulated Mr. Brady on the extension of his contract and stated that although it may premature, looks forward to working with him and noted that he is doing a good job and is well respected in this community. Commissioner Jordan thanked staff for all of their hard work and appreciates the work they do. She indicated that she doesn't mean to be hard on staff but she is a stickler about certain things and is protecting the City in the City's best interest. She indicated that she would e-mail staff with any questions, prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Consultant Coury indicated that e- mailing is good because they can respond in writing to the Commissioners. Commissioner O'Neal requested Susan Reid's e-mail address. City Attorney Leibold indicated that Susan Reid's e-mail address is: sreid @lake - elsinore.org. Commissioner O'Neal asked that Ms. Reid put the letter he drafted on the City's stationary and requested that all of the legislators get copies also. City Manager Brady confirmed that the letter would be completed and copies will be forwarded to all legislators as well as the City Council. Vice Chairman Mendoza thanked staff for their hard work and also wanted to thank John Herrera, the City's Information Technology Technician for his help with setting up his e-mail and mentioned how patient and upbeat Mr. Herrera is. City Manager Brady indicated that Mr. Herrera is a very good employee. Commissioner Jordan seconded that and indicated that he helped her get back on e-mail. Chairman Gonzales reminded the Commissioners that their Form 700 has to be turned into the City Clerk's office. Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Regular Meeting Minutes of March 1, 2011 Page 22 of 22 Commissioner O'Neal stated that he did not receive the Form 700 and mentioned that in the past it has been mailed to his home. It was noted by staff and the Planning Commission that the next Planning Commission meeting to be held on March 15, 2011, would be cancelled. Chairman Gonzales closed the meeting in memory of those in Christ Church, a Church that was destroyed in South Island, New Zealand, where he spent time in the past. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Gonzales adjourned the meeting at 8:10 p.m. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore is scheduled for Tuesday, April 5, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. in the Cultural Center located at 183 N. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530. Respectfully Submitted, L ino Kristine Herrington Office Specialist Attest: — Z&/J� obert A. B ady City Manager