Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-18-2017 NAHCity of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, July 18, 2017 CALL TO ORDER A Regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore was held in the Cultural Center, 185 North Main Street, on the above date. The meeting was called to order at 6.01 p.m.by Chairman Armit. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Klaarenbeek. ROLL CALL Present. Commissioners Carroll, Ross and Klaarenbeek; Chairman Armit and Vice-Chair Gray BUSINESS ITEM(S) 1) Reorqanization of the Planninq Commission Principal Planner Kirk opened the nominations for Chair. lt was moved by Chairman Armit to nominate Vice-Chair Gray and unanimously carried. Chairman Gray opened the nominations for Vice-Chair. lt was was moved by Commissioner Carroll to nominate Commissioner Ross and unanimously carried. 2) PA 2016-94. Phase 1 Municipal Code Clean Up - More Efficient Processinq of Entitlements. Principal Planner Kirk presented the Staff Report and responded to questions from the Commissioners. There was consensus from the Commission that this was a great move forward and for staff to proceed with clean up. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES There were no members of the public appearing to speak. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM(S) 3) Approval of Minutes - June 6,2017 It was moved by Commissioner Armit, seconded by Vice-Chair Ross, and carried to approve meeting minutes. "5 LS:l'{() I lir.t.i.r., I ,ai | | \1i PUBLIC HEARING ITEM(S) 4) Planninq Application No. 2017-21 - A request to lnstall a 1 ,512 sq. ft. Manufactured Home wrth a 480 sq. ft. Detached Two-Car Garaqe. The Public Hearing was opened at 6:20 p.m. There were no conflict of lnterest disclosures. Administratjve Clerk Wells affirmed receipt of Proof of Publication and noted that correspondence had been received. Community Development Technician Poley presented the Staff Report. Chairman Gray stated that he assumed staff is satisfied with the alterations to the design that is before Planning Commission. Poley replied that staff was satisfied. Commissioner Armit questioned if the Project was recommended to be approved by staff at the previous meeting. Poley said that it was. Commissioner Klaarenbeek said from what he understood, the applicant was working with some of the request from staff but still had many issues with the Project. He said he believed that all residents deserve the same consrderation. The Project does not help the property values of the adjacent homes, and still has issues with the Project. Commissioner Armit asked if staff and the applicant discussed integrating the garage into the unit in order to make the Project look more like a stick built home. Poley stated that it was not. Principal Planner Kirk explained that there was some discussion about location and narrowness of the lot that would restrict the ability of adding a20 x20 garage to the front. The applicant Terry Mohr was available for questions. He said the reason the garage was in the back was because the lot was not wide enough and wanted to meet the setback requirements on both sides of the house. Mohr introduced Craig Williams the owner of M & W Homes to answer any questions Planning Commission may have regarding the structure of the mobile home. Willams provided the Planning Commission a brief history and description of the Mobile homes. He explained that the manufactured homes were built to Hud Building Code. The homes were on a chassis but you never see it because it is ground set. Commissioner Klaarenbeek said he had no idea what type of Project the City would be getting with the exhibits that were presented to the Planning Commission. He asked Williams if there were any brochures or pictures the Planning Commission could look at. The applicant Terry Mohr presented a picture to the Planning Commission. Klaarenbeek questioned Williams if the front porch was an option that normally came with the home. Williams said the porch was not part of the home, it would be built as an accessory to the home. When the home is shipped to the property, the porch will be added on. Klaarenbeek clarified that the awning and the roof of the manufactured home would not be the same material. The awning would be made of aluminum wood. Willams stated that was correct. Mohr explained that a contractor would build the awning and it was in the plans provided. The awning would match the house. The front deck and the awning were requested at the meeting on June 6,2017. He sard it was decided that the porch would meet the size of the 4 x 4 awning. Klaarenbeek asked where the porch would be located and if it was a ground level porch. Mohr explained that the porch would be right in front of the front door and it would be ground level. There was more discussion and clarification as to where the porch should be located. Kirk explained that there was a Condition of Approval No. 27, which would state: prior to the issuance of a slab permit, the applicant shall submit plans depicting additional architectural enhancements. Kirk said those architectural enhancements have been addressed and discussed. The stone veneer, the wood trim around the windows and the patio cover itself. All windows facing the front of the property for review by the Community Development Director. Kirk explained that this was consistent with what had been previously approved with other manufactured homes, with getting the modifications. Staff has been working with the applicant and has not been able to get great elevations but was comfortable with the information received with the assurance of what is being added, and what is seen from the footprint of the building. Kirk said a permit would not be approved before all the enhancements are seen. Staff would circle back with Planning Commission on what the final enhancements look like. Chairman Gray asked the applicant Terry Mohr if he understood and accepted the Conditions of Approval as they were presented to him. Mohr stated that he did. Commissioner Armit explained that the design problem he was having with the unit is that it is set parallel to the road with the entrance of the unit to a wall. lt creates a very flat surface nearing the road, where as other units are designed to be installed 90 degrees and tend to have a porch or patio on the front. The Mohr Project has a flat fagade. He questioned if it was because the home had to be moved from point A to point B and was limited to shipping options. Williams said that there is a limit on shipping width and the units are built on site, so there can't be too many projections. Armit explained that the Planning Commission was looking for the unit to have the appearance of a normal house. When there is a flat fagade on one side with no articulation of the roofline coming outward or the illusion of such, it looks like a manufactured home. He suggested putting a porch or a deck to give the front of the house projection, to make it more consistent with some of the homes in the neighborhood. Willams questioned what would be the Planning Commissions recommendation on how this modular home should be set, with the criteria and the dimensions of the lot and the setbacks. Armit said that he thought the awning looked like it was something that was bolted onto the front of the house. Mohr explained that he changed his site plan to add the awning and porch as requested on the June 6, 2017, meeting. Armit told Mohr that it was made clear at the June 6, 2017, meetang that the Planning Commission did not want a bolted on awning on the front of the home, and it needed architectural additions to the house. Mohr questioned what the suggestion of the Planning Commission would be on how to install the awn ing. Armit stated that he was going off the pictures and the architectural drawings that were provided. Mohr said that he also submitted a complete draught tolerant landscape plan. Armit said according to the drawing, there would be a DG, two trees and ten plants. He questioned I\/ohr if that was what he considered landscape. Mohr nodded yes. Ross questioned if the landscape was consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. Armit stated a 56 ft. wide by 20 ft. yard deep with DG and two trees in the middle, is not consistent with the neighborhood. Gray asked Mohr if there was any room for any additional planting close to the house wall that might enhance the appearance. Mohr replied that it could be enhanced. He explained that he is trying to purchase the land next to the Project so he could add on to that property. He said that his future plans were to add a large cement drive way to come around to the garage and improve the property, but would like to get a house on the property so he can get some rent. Gray said he shared the other Commissioners concerns, the setting in the neighborhood should be enhanced and whatever additional touches that can be added (such and landscaping on the driveway side) would help. Armit explained that the picture he had was the original drawing of the Pro.iect. The front elevation shows an awning that is attached to the house but has no post attached to the ground. Armit recommended that lvlohr have the awning project a foot or two pass the drip line of the house. Ross added thatthe porch should be a 10 x 6 porch instead of a4 x4 porch. Mohr stated that those were very good points. He asked the Commissioners to keep in mind that there was a 20 ft. set back, and the house was set back another five ft. in the second site plan to accommodate the porch. He said he would be willing to set it back again. Kirk said that as discussed on the June 6, 2017, meeting non-habitable structures could encroach into the front yard setbacks. l\ilohr stated he missed that at the last meeting. Kirk stated that staff would work with the applicant on getting a projection into the 20 ft. setback for additional architectural relief. He said his understanding, per the building official, is that there cannot be affixed structures to the building. And, the patio cover (awning) would have to be free standing. Klaarenbeek clarified that affixed structures would need to be acquired by HCD for the connection. He suggested having the modular home perpendicular to the street, place the garage and have a breezeway attachment. That way it would provide more of a stick built look to it. Armit suggested extending the porch a few feet to allow for the articulated depth that is needed, then Mohr would not need an awning. Mohr said he would be happy to do those things. He explained that the engineer did have the home perpendicular, but he wanted the porch to face the front of the street, so he changed it. Mohr explained that the engineer also had the garage way in the back cause it would not fit. Once the property next I door was acquired, he said he could put the garage there. Mohr explained that he would like to work with staff and Planning Commission to get the Project up. Kirk clarified that the flat plane is what diminishes the traditional construction, if there were a projection out further than the 4 x 4, then work with a dormer element that matches the existing roofline that pushes out a little bit and break up that plane so it is not as dominate. Then, the trim with the brick veneer and the window surrounds, and then the structure would look more traditional. Carroll stated he felt very comfortable with this Project because of the applicant's willingness to work with staff and Planning Commission on what the City would like, and would like to motion to approve the Project. There was no further discussion, the Public Hearing was declared closed at 6:50 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Armit, seconded by Commissioner Carroll, and unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolutions. Resolution No. 2017-49: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT PLANNING APPLICATION NO,2017-21 (RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2017-09) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MSHCP) It was moved by Commissioner Carroll, seconded by Vice-Chair Ross, and carried noting the dissention of Commissioner Klaarenbeek, to adopt the Resolution Resolution No. 201 7-50: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2017-21 (RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2017-09) FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A 1 ,512 SQUARE FOOT MANUFATURED HOME WITH A 480 SQUARE FOOT DETACHED GARAGE LOCATED AT APNs. 378-234-007 AND 030; or, .provided modifications to Conditions of Approval No. 27 which specifies additional architectural enhancements to include architectural projection by way of an architectural element which is consistent with the existing manufactured home materials and architectural profile/dormer roof element. .Armit noted that the applicant agreed to add additional landscape element. STAFF COMMENTS Community Development Director Taylor said that Walmart should be submitting their working drawings for plan check soon. The sports complex is through building and fire plan check for a 10 acre slab, engineering should be done and following up with their working drawings. Artisan Alley is on hold, they have done their grading but they are waiting for the sports complex to start going. Ld Quinta in is almost through plan check and breaking ground soon. Senior Planner Kirk congratulated the new Chair and Vace-Chair and said he is looking forward to the next year. He spoke of upcoming Projects. City Attorney David Mann also congratulated the new Chair and Vice-Chair and thanked them for their service. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS Commissioner Klaarenbeek congratulated the Commissioners. Klaarenbeek spoke about the Mohr Project and said he was disappointed with it. Commissioner Carroll thanked Armit for the last year and congratulated the new Chair and Vice-Chair on their positions, and said he was looking forward to the next year. Vice-Chair Ross thanked Commissioner Carroll for the nomination. He said he agreed with Commissioner Klaarenbeek's statement about the Mohr Project. Commissioner Armit spoke on some of the landscaping in the City. He also stated that he did not agree with the Mohr Project with regards to landscape plans. Chairman Gray congratulated Commissioner Carroll on their new baby girl. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. to Tuesday, August 1,2017,in the Cultural Center, 185 N. Main Street. t_